Re: [PATCH 6/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently on frv
From: Paul E. McKenney
Date: Wed Aug 15 2007 - 15:59:58 EST
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 09:46:55PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >>>Well if there is only one memory location involved, then smp_rmb()
> >>>isn't
> >>>going to really do anything anyway, so it would be incorrect to use
> >>>it.
> >>
> >>rmb() orders *any* two reads; that includes two reads from the same
> >>location.
> >
> >If the two reads are to the same location, all CPUs I am aware of
> >will maintain the ordering without need for a memory barrier.
>
> That's true of course, although there is no real guarantee for that.
A CPU that did not provide this property ("cache coherence") would be
most emphatically reviled. So we are pretty safe assuming that CPUs
will provide it.
Thanx, Paul
-
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/