Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 20 Jan 2015 09:03:12 -0500 | From | Peter Hurley <> | Subject | Re: Linux 3.19-rc3 |
| |
On 01/19/2015 07:30 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 12:47:53PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 02:57:37PM -0500, Peter Hurley wrote: > > [ . . . ] > >> David Miller's call, actually. >> >> But the rule is that if it is an atomic read-modify-write operation and it >> returns a value, then the operation itself needs to include full memory >> barriers before and after (as in the caller doesn't need to add them). >> Otherwise, the operation does not need to include memory ordering. >> Since xchg(), atomic_xchg(), and atomic_long_xchg() all return a value, >> their implementations must include full memory barriers before and after. >> >> Pretty straightforward. ;-) > > Hello again, Peter, > > Were you going to push a patch clarifying this?
Hi Paul,
As you pointed out, atomic_ops.txt is for arch implementors, so I wasn't planning on patching that file.
I've been meaning to write up something specifically for everyone else but my own bugs have kept me from that. [That, and I'm not sure what I write will be suitable for Documentation.]
Regards, Peter Hurley
| |