From: Hollis Blanchard <hollisb@us.ibm.com>
To: linuxppc64-dev@ozlabs.org
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
akpm@osdl.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, bcrl@linux.intel.com,
matthew@wil.cx, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
jblunck@suse.de
Subject: Re: Memory barriers and spin_unlock safety
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 15:18:13 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200603031518.15806.hollisb@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1141419966.3888.67.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Friday 03 March 2006 15:06, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> The main problem I've had in the past with the ppc barriers is more a
> subtle thing in the spec that unfortunately was taken to the word by
> implementors, and is that the simple write barrier (eieio) will only
> order within the same storage space, that is will not order between
> cacheable and non-cacheable storage.
I've heard Sparc has the same issue... in which case it may not be a "chip
designer was too literal" thing, but rather it really simplifies chip
implementation to do it that way.
--
Hollis Blanchard
IBM Linux Technology Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-03 21:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-03 16:03 Memory barriers and spin_unlock safety David Howells
2006-03-03 16:45 ` David Howells
2006-03-03 17:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-03-03 20:17 ` David Howells
2006-03-03 21:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-03-03 21:51 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2006-03-03 22:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-03-03 22:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-03-07 17:36 ` David Howells
2006-03-07 17:40 ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-03-07 17:56 ` Jesse Barnes
2006-03-07 18:18 ` Alan Cox
2006-03-07 18:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-03-07 18:55 ` Alan Cox
2006-03-07 20:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-03-03 20:02 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-03-03 16:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-03-03 20:15 ` David Howells
2006-03-03 21:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-03-03 21:06 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-03-03 21:18 ` Hollis Blanchard [this message]
2006-03-03 21:52 ` David S. Miller
2006-03-03 22:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-03-04 10:58 ` Paul Mackerras
2006-03-04 22:49 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-03-04 10:58 ` Paul Mackerras
2006-03-04 17:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-03-08 3:20 ` Paul Mackerras
2006-03-08 3:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-03-08 13:12 ` Alan Cox
2006-03-08 15:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-03-05 2:04 ` Michael Buesch
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200603031518.15806.hollisb@us.ibm.com \
--to=hollisb@us.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=bcrl@linux.intel.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=jblunck@suse.de \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc64-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox