lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Aug]   [17]   [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
Herbert Xu writes:

> On Fri, Aug 17, 2007 at 03:09:57PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> > Herbert Xu writes:
> >
> > > Can you find an actual atomic_read code snippet there that is
> > > broken without the volatile modifier?
> >
> > There are some in arch-specific code, for example line 1073 of
> > arch/mips/kernel/smtc.c. On mips, cpu_relax() is just barrier(), so
> > the empty loop body is ok provided that atomic_read actually does the
> > load each time around the loop.
>
> A barrier() is all you need to force the compiler to reread
> the value.
>
> The people advocating volatile in this thread are talking
> about code that doesn't use barrier()/cpu_relax().

Did you look at it? Here it is:

/* Someone else is initializing in parallel - let 'em finish */
while (atomic_read(&idle_hook_initialized) < 1000)
;

Paul.
-
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: 2007-08-17 07:45    [W:1.364 / U:0.004 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site