From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dave.martin@linaro.org (Dave Martin) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 17:42:42 +0000 Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/4] b.L: Memory barriers and miscellaneous tidyups In-Reply-To: References: <1358268498-8086-1-git-send-email-dave.martin@linaro.org> Message-ID: <20130115174242.GA1983@linaro.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 12:29:22PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Tue, 15 Jan 2013, Dave Martin wrote: > > > After much head-scratching and discussion, I have concluded that we > > need comprehensive memory barriers in order to ensure that the > > low-level synchronisation code executes robustly on all platforms. > > > > DSBs are excessive on most situations though, so many DSBs can be > > replces with DMBs. > > > > As was observed in review, providing a C interface to the vlocks > > makes little sense, so this series gets rid of it. > > Thanks. I have already removed the C stuff in my version but I'll merge > the rest no problem. OK, I wasn't sure whether you'd already done that, but figured the patch would be trivial to throw away (it's not like I invested a lot of time in that one!) I've done my best with the barriers, but if you have any concerns about correctness, let me know. Cheers ---Dave