lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Aug]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateFri, 24 Aug 2007 10:06:29 -0700 (PDT)
FromChristoph Lameter <>
SubjectRe: [PATCH] i386: Fix a couple busy loops in mach_wakecpu.h:wait_for_init_deassert()
On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Satyam Sharma wrote:

> But if people do seem to have a mixed / confused notion of atomicity
> and barriers, and if there's consensus, then as I'd said earlier, I
> have no issues in going with the consensus (eg. having API variants).
> Linus would be more difficult to convince, however, I suspect :-)

The confusion may be the result of us having barrier semantics in 
atomic_read. If we take that out then we may avoid future confusions.

-
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: 2007-08-24 17:09    [W:0.766 / U:0.170 seconds]
©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans