Re: Question about memory barriers

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Thu, 2 Feb 2006, Alan Stern wrote:

> The kernel's documentation about memory barriers is rather skimpy.  I
> gather that rmb() guarantees that all preceding reads will have completed
> before any following reads are made, and wmb() guarantees that all
> preceding writes will have completed before any following writes are made.
> I also gather that mb() is essentially the same as rmb() and wmb() put
> together.
> But suppose I need to prevent a read from being moved past a write?  It
> doesn't look like either rmb() or wmb() will do this.  And if mb() is the
> same as "rmb(); wmb();" then it won't either.  So what's the right thing
> to do?
> Alan Stern

If you use the correct macros for device I/O (in other words
the operations are upon volatile objects), there can never
be any re-ordering of any associated code.

Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version on an i686 machine (5589.66 BogoMips).
Warning : 98.36% of all statistics are fiction.
To unsubscribe

The information transmitted in this message is confidential and may be privileged.  Any review, retransmission, dissemination, or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please notify Analogic Corporation immediately - by replying to this message or by sending an email to [email protected] - and destroy all copies of this information, including any attachments, without reading or disclosing them.

Thank you.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux