[lkml]   [2000]   [Sep]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: spin_lock forgets to clobber memory and other smp fixes [was Re: [patch] waitqueue optimization, 2.4.0-test7]
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> "volatile" should be equivalent to clobbering memory, although the gcc
> manual pages are certainly not very verbose on the issue.

It isn't. Try the following with/without the memory clobber:

int *p;
int func()
int x;
x = *p;
__asm__ __volatile__ ("" : : : "memory");
x = *p;
return x;

With or without, the program reads *p only once. However, with the
clobber it reads _after_ the asm; without, it reads _before_ the asm.

It's ok for the compiler to do that (given we don't know what "volatile"
means anyway :-). But it does have implications for spin_lock:
spin_lock must say that it clobbers memory.

spin_unlock should also say it clobbers memory but I have no test case
to demonstrate the compiler moving reads down past an asm.

-- Jamie
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:38    [W:0.226 / U:0.340 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site