![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Herbert Xu wrote: > On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 03:48:54PM -0400, Chris Snook wrote: >>> Can you find an actual atomic_read code snippet there that is >>> broken without the volatile modifier? >> A whole bunch of atomic_read uses will be broken without the volatile >> modifier once we start removing barriers that aren't needed if volatile >> behavior is guaranteed. > > Could you please cite the file/function names so we can > see whether removing the barrier makes sense? > > Thanks, At a glance, several architectures' implementations of smp_call_function() have one or more legitimate atomic_read() busy-waits that shouldn't be using CPU-relax. Some of them do work in the loop. I'm sure there are plenty more examples that various maintainers could find in their own code. -- Chris - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2007-08-17 04:09 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||