In message <39783869.382726BA@colorfullife.com> you write:
> I'm interested in the ordering of atomic_xy and bit operations: I heard
> that they must be full memory barriers, but at least the ia64 port only
> uses a partial memory barrier.
>From kernel-locking.tmpl:
Any atomic operation is defined to act as a memory barrier
(ie. as per the <function>mb()</function> macro).
If people are building locks with the test_* bitops and atomic_*_test
functions, we only need a partial barrier requirement as spin_lock().
This implies non-test atomic ops must have same barrier properties as
spin_unlock().
Alan? Does it make sense to weaken this restriction?
Rusty.
-- Hacking time.- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 31 2000 - 21:00:25 EST