From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: davidm@hpl.hp.com
Cc: davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com, engebret@vnet.ibm.com,
justincarlson@cmu.edu, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, anton@samba.org, ak@suse.de
Subject: Re: Memory Barrier Definitions
Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 17:36:46 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020509173646.5c1b5baa.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <15577.23356.338023.88947@napali.hpl.hp.com>
On Wed, 8 May 2002 10:07:08 -0700
David Mosberger <davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com> wrote:
> The ia64 memory ordering model is quite orthogonal to the one that
> Linux uses (which is based on the Alpha instructions): Linux
> distinguishes between read and write memory barriers. ia64 uses an
> acquire/release model instead. An acquire orders all *later* memory
> accesses and a release orders all *earlier* accesses (regardless of
> whether they are reads or writes). Another difference is that the
> acquire/release semantics is attached to load/store instructions,
> respectively. This means that in an ideal world, ia64 would rarely
> need to use the memory barrier instruction.
Hmmm... could you explain more? You're saying that every load is
an "acquire" and every store a "release"? Or that they can be flagged
that way, but aren't always?
Does this means that an "acquire" means "all accesses after this insn
(in the code stream) must occur after this insn (in time)"? Does
that only apply to the address that instruction touched, or all?
Confused,
Rusty.
--
there are those who do and those who hang on and you don't see too
many doers quoting their contemporaries. -- Larry McVoy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-05-09 7:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-05-07 19:07 Memory Barrier Definitions Dave Engebretsen
2002-05-07 19:49 ` Alan Cox
2002-05-07 19:53 ` Dave Engebretsen
2002-05-07 20:27 ` Alan Cox
2002-05-07 21:23 ` Dave Engebretsen
2002-05-07 22:15 ` justincarlson
2002-05-08 2:49 ` Dave Engebretsen
2002-05-08 13:54 ` Justin Carlson
2002-05-08 15:27 ` Dave Engebretsen
2002-05-08 15:49 ` Andi Kleen
2002-05-08 17:07 ` David Mosberger
2002-05-09 7:36 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2002-05-09 8:01 ` Keith Owens
2002-05-09 15:00 ` David Mosberger
2002-05-13 3:26 ` Rusty Russell
2002-05-13 16:36 ` David Mosberger
2002-05-13 16:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-05-13 17:53 ` David Mosberger
2002-05-13 23:28 ` Rusty Russell
2002-05-07 22:57 ` Anton Blanchard
2002-05-13 18:16 ` Jesse Barnes
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-05-09 11:33 Manfred Spraul
2002-05-09 19:38 ` Dave Engebretsen
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=20020509173646.5c1b5baa.rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=davidm@hpl.hp.com \
--cc=davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com \
--cc=engebret@vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=justincarlson@cmu.edu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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