Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 3 Jul 2009 11:06:06 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCHv5 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock |
| |
* Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote:
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h > @@ -302,4 +302,7 @@ static inline void __raw_write_unlock(raw_rwlock_t *rw) > #define _raw_read_relax(lock) cpu_relax() > #define _raw_write_relax(lock) cpu_relax() > > +/* The {read|write|spin}_lock() on x86 are full memory barriers. */ > +#define smp_mb__after_lock() do { } while (0)
Two small stylistic comments, please make this an inline function:
static inline void smp_mb__after_lock(void) { } #define smp_mb__after_lock
(untested)
> +/* The lock does not imply full memory barrier. */ > +#ifndef smp_mb__after_lock > +#define smp_mb__after_lock() smp_mb() > +#endif
ditto.
Ingo
| |