RE: Synchronizing Bit operations V2

[Christoph Lameter]

On Thu, 30 Mar 2006, Chen, Kenneth W wrote:

> > It precise the uncleanness in ia64 that such semantics are attached to 
> > these bit operations which may lead people to depend on those. We need to 
> > either make these explicit or not depend on them.
> 
> I know, I'm saying since it doesn't make any difference from API point of
> view whether it is acq, rel, or no ordering, then just make them rel as a
> "preferred" Operation on ia64.

That would make the behavior of clear_bit different from other bitops and 
references to volatile pointers. I'd like to have this as consistent as 
possible.

-
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/