lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Aug]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
    On Tue, 14 Aug 2007, Chris Snook wrote:

    > But barriers force a flush of *everything* in scope, which we generally don't
    > want. On the other hand, we pretty much always want to flush atomic_*
    > operations. One way or another, we should be restricting the volatile
    > behavior to the thing that needs it. On most architectures, this patch set
    > just moves that from the declaration, where it is considered harmful, to the
    > use, where it is considered an occasional necessary evil.

    Then we would need

    atomic_read()

    and

    atomic_read_volatile()

    atomic_read_volatile() would imply an object sized memory barrier before
    and after?
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-08-15 01:21    [W:0.029 / U:0.148 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site