[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Difference between atomic operations and memory barriers
Noah Watkins wrote:
>> So we can safely assume that pointer assignment will be done in an
>> atomic manner?
> See the the comment above rcu_assign_pointer in
> include/linux/rcupdate.h

This comment only talks about ordering, not about atomicity.

Again, AFAIR the ISO C spec should explain what is going to be
guaranteed atomic and what might not be atomic.

rcu_assign_pointer() itself does rely on atomicity of pointer
assignments though, like lots of code elsewhere in the kernel.
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--= =-=- ==-=-

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-10-26 20:37    [W:0.079 / U:63.008 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site