Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 15 Feb 2011 11:53:37 +0000 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] jump label: 2.6.38 updates | From | Will Newton <> |
| |
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:09 PM, Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
Hi Paul,
> What CPU family are we talking about here? For cache coherent CPUs, > cache coherence really is supposed to work, even for mixed atomic and > non-atomic instructions to the same variable.
Is there a specific situation you can think of where this would be a problem? I have to admit to a certain amount of unease with the design our hardware guys came up with, but I don't have a specific case where it won't work, just cases where it is less than optimal. -- 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/
| |