Messages in this thread | | | From | David Howells <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Document Linux's memory barriers [try #2] | Date | Wed, 08 Mar 2006 17:04:51 +0000 |
| |
Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com> wrote:
> [For information on bus mastering DMA and coherency please read ....] > > sincee have a doc on this
Documentation/pci.txt?
> The use of volatile generates poorer code and hides the serialization in > type declarations that may be far from the code.
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
> Is this true of IA-64 ??
Are you referring to non-temporal loads and stores?
> > +There are some more advanced barriering functions: > > "barriering" ... ick, barrier.
Picky:-)
> Should clarify local ordering v SMP ordering for locks implied here.
Do you mean explain what each sort of lock does?
> > + (*) inX(), outX(): > > + > > + These are intended to talk to legacy i386 hardware using an alternate bus > > + addressing mode. They are synchronous as far as the x86 CPUs are > > Not really true. Lots of PCI devices use them. Need to talk about "I/O space"
Which bit is not really true?
David - 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/
| |