Re: Q: schedule() and implied barriers on arm64
From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Tue Oct 27 2015 - 20:11:00 EST
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 04:19:48PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> ... and the 'normal' code will have a control hazard somewhere, followed
> by the implicit ISB in exception return, so there's a barrier of sorts
> there too.
Which exception return?
> The problem is that people say "full barrier" without defining what it
> really means, and we end up going round the houses on things like
> transitivity (which ctrl + isb doesn't always give you).
I pretty much meant smp_mb() here :-)
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/