From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Joel Schopp <jschopp@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] powerpc: rmb fix
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 21:43:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d9f43b5c31fde5851a7af1d0f36eb134@kernel.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46CB37D4.2080609@austin.ibm.com>
>> #define mb() __asm__ __volatile__ ("sync" : : : "memory")
>> -#define rmb() __asm__ __volatile__ (__stringify(LWSYNC) : : :
>> "memory")
>> +#define rmb() __asm__ __volatile__ ("sync" : : : "memory")
>> #define wmb() __asm__ __volatile__ ("sync" : : : "memory")
>> #define read_barrier_depends() do { } while(0)
>>
>> @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@
>> #ifdef __KERNEL__
>> #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
>> #define smp_mb() mb()
>> -#define smp_rmb() rmb()
>> +#define smp_rmb() __asm__ __volatile__ (__stringify(LWSYNC) : : :
>> "memory")
>> #define smp_wmb() eieio()
>> #define smp_read_barrier_depends() read_barrier_depends()
>> #else
>
> I had to think about this one for awhile. It looks at first glance to
> be the right
> thing to do. But I do wonder how long rmb() has been lwsync
Since the {ppc,ppc64} -> powerpc merge.
> and if as a practical matter that has caused any problems?
It has not as far as I know.
> If this isn't causing any problems maybe there
> is some loigic we are overlooking?
The I/O accessor functions enforce the necessary ordering
already I believe.
Segher
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-21 19:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-21 2:11 [patch 1/2] powerpc: rmb fix Nick Piggin
2007-08-21 2:16 ` [patch 1/2] powerpc: smp_wmb speedup Nick Piggin
2007-08-21 2:21 ` Nick Piggin
2007-08-21 19:07 ` [patch 1/2] powerpc: rmb fix Joel Schopp
2007-08-21 19:43 ` Segher Boessenkool [this message]
2007-08-21 21:42 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-22 1:16 ` Nick Piggin
2007-08-22 3:29 ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-08-22 3:55 ` Nick Piggin
2007-08-23 17:57 ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-08-24 2:47 ` Nick Piggin
2007-08-22 3:15 ` Nick Piggin
2007-08-22 3:33 ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-08-22 4:05 ` Nick Piggin
2007-08-23 17:49 ` Segher Boessenkool
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-05-21 14:10 Nick Piggin
2008-05-21 15:27 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-05-21 15:32 ` Nick Piggin
2008-05-21 15:43 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-05-23 2:14 ` Paul Mackerras
2008-05-23 4:40 ` Nick Piggin
2008-05-23 4:53 ` Paul Mackerras
2008-05-23 5:48 ` Nick Piggin
2008-05-23 6:40 ` Paul Mackerras
2008-05-26 1:38 ` Nick Piggin
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=d9f43b5c31fde5851a7af1d0f36eb134@kernel.crashing.org \
--to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=jschopp@austin.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=paulus@samba.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).