lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Oct]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC v2 5/7] powerpc: atomic: Implement cmpxchg{,64}_* and atomic{,64}_cmpxchg_* variants
On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 02:36:26PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 02:27:15PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:49:33PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > > Unlike other atomic operation variants, cmpxchg{,64}_acquire and
> > > atomic{,64}_cmpxchg_acquire don't have acquire semantics if the cmp part
> > > fails, so we need to implement these using assembly.
> >
> > I think that is actually expected and documented. That is, a cmpxchg
> > only implies barriers on success. See:
> >
> > ed2de9f74ecb ("locking/Documentation: Clarify failed cmpxchg() memory ordering semantics")
>
> Also:
>
> 654672d4ba1a6 (Will Deacon 2015-08-06 17:54:37 +0100 28) * store portion of the operation. Note that a failed cmpxchg_acquire
> 654672d4ba1a6 (Will Deacon 2015-08-06 17:54:37 +0100 29) * does -not- imply any memory ordering constraints.

Agreed, no need for ordering on failed cmpxchg.

Thanx, Paul



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-10-01 17:41    [W:0.169 / U:0.196 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site