From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rusty Russell Subject: Re: [RFC] virtio: use mandatory barriers for remote processor vdevs Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 12:58:59 +1030 Message-ID: <87zkfdrpn8.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> References: <1322569886-13055-1-git-send-email-ohad@wizery.com> <20111129131110.GC19157@redhat.com> <20111129151958.GA31789@redhat.com> <20111130145004.GD21413@redhat.com> <20111130231306.GD30031@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20111130231306.GD30031@redhat.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Ohad Ben-Cohen Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On Thu, 1 Dec 2011 01:13:07 +0200, "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > For x86, stores into memory are ordered. So I think that yes, smp_XXX > can be selected at compile time. > > So let's forget the virtio strangeness for a minute, Hmm, we got away with light barriers because we knew we were not *really* talking to a device. But now with virtio-mmio, turns out we are :) I'm really tempted to revert d57ed95 for 3.2, and we can revisit this optimization later if it proves worthwhile. Thoughts? Rusty.