Re: [PATCH 6/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently on frv

David Howells
2007-08-10T09:24:47Z

Chris Snook <csnook@redhat.com> wrote:

> To head off the criticism, I admit this is an oversimplification, and true
> busy-waiters should be using cpu_relax(), which contains a barrier.

Why would you want to use cpu_relax()? That's there to waste time efficiently,
isn't it? Shouldn't you be using smp_rmb() or something like that?

David