From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6] pcnet32: Remove pointless memory barriers Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 17:19:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20090429.171936.91197184.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1240945659.8819.9.camel@Maple> <1241050188.18295.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: john.dykstra1@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, romieu@fr.zoreil.com To: pcnet32@verizon.net Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:38060 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751104AbZD3ATm (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:19:42 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1241050188.18295.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Don Fry Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 17:09:48 -0700 > After going back to my original NAPI changes, email exchanges today with > Francois and John, and looking through all the architecture > implementation of mmiowb and locking; I agree that this mmiowb is > unnecessary since a lock is always released which has all the memory > barriers needed. I no longer have access to all the equipment I had > available at IBM, but it was tested a extensively on Intel and Power > platforms without the mmiowb. > > Acked-by: Don Fry Looks good to me too, I'll apply this to net-next-2.6 Thanks