From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sinan Kaya Subject: Re: [PATCH] io: prevent compiler reordering on the default writeX() implementation Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2018 10:46:05 -0400 Message-ID: <4e3acc1a-0c06-5b1b-1b87-91bef2daae38@codeaurora.org> References: <1522420199-23548-1-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1522420199-23548-1-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: arnd@arndb.de, timur@codeaurora.org, sulrich@codeaurora.org Cc: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On 3/30/2018 10:29 AM, Sinan Kaya wrote: > In the abscence of a write barrier or when using a strongly ordered > architecture, writeX() should at least have a compiler barrier in > it to prevent commpiler from clobbering the execution order. Same is true for readX(). I'll wait for review feedback on this before posting another change for readX(). -- Sinan Kaya Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.