Re: [RFC patch 04/15] get_cycles() : powerpc64 HAVE_GET_CYCLES (update)

Paul Mackerras
2008-10-17T01:13:30Z

Mathieu Desnoyers writes:

> Do you know if mtfb implies an instruction synchronization (isync) ? I

It doesn't.

> think that if it does not, the new get_cycles_barrier() might have to be
> used at some locations in the kernel code if more precise timestamp
> order is required.

OK. I'll let you figure out where. :)

Paul.