Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 31 Aug 2015 20:33:35 +0200 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification |
| |
On 08/31, Boqun Feng wrote: > > Fair enough, I went too far. How about just a single paragraph saying > that: > > The wake_up(), wait_event() and their friends have proper barriers in > them, but these implicity barriers are only for the correctness for > sleep and wakeup. So don't rely on these barriers for things that are > neither wait-conditons nor task states. > > Is that OK to you?
Ask Paul ;) but personally I agree.
To me, the only thing a user should know about wake_up/try_to_wake_up and barriers is that you do not need another barrier between setting condition and waking up.
Oleg.
| |