From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
akpm@osdl.org, mingo@redhat.com, jblunck@suse.de,
bcrl@linux.intel.com, matthew@wil.cx,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
linuxppc64-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: Memory barriers and spin_unlock safety
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 20:15:35 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5001.1141416935@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0603030823200.22647@g5.osdl.org>
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> wrote:
> The rules are, afaik, that reads can pass buffered writes, BUT WRITES
> CANNOT PASS READS (aka "writes to memory are always carried out in program
> order").
So in the example I gave, a read after the spin_unlock() may actually get
executed before the store in the spin_unlock(), but a read before the unlock
will not get executed after.
> No. Issuing a read barrier on one CPU will do absolutely _nothing_ on the
> other CPU.
Well, I think you mean will guarantee absolutely _nothing_ on the other CPU for
the Linux kernel. According to the IBM powerpc book I have, it does actually
do something on the other CPUs, though it doesn't say exactly what.
Anyway, thanks.
I'll write up some documentation on barriers for inclusion in the kernel.
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-03 20:16 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 [this message]
2006-03-03 21:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-03-03 21:06 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-03-03 21:18 ` Hollis Blanchard
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=5001.1141416935@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com \
--to=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=bcrl@linux.intel.com \
--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