On Sat, Oct 15, 2005 at 04:07:02PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
> Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 22:07:01 +0200
>
> > sure see alpha:
> >
> > __asm__ __volatile__(
> > "1: ldq_l %0,%1\n"
> > " addq %0,%3,%2\n"
> > " addq %0,%3,%0\n"
> > " stq_c %0,%1\n"
> > " beq %0,2f\n"
> > " mb\n"
> >
> > the memory barrier is applied way after the write is visible to other
> > cpus, you can even get an irq before the mb and block there for some
> > usec.
>
> For atomic operations returning values, there must be a memory
> barrier both before and after the atomic operation. This is
> defined in Documentation/atomic_ops.txt, so Alpha needs to be
> fixed to add a memory barrier at the beginning of these
> assembler sequences.
My opinion is that we don't need a barrier even _after_ ll/sc sequences
on Alpha - it's redundant; perhaps it's just a historical baggage.
I strongly believe that ll/sc _does_ imply an SMP memory barrier, as can
be seen from instructions timing: a standalone mb takes tens of cycles,
the mb before/after ll/sc takes 0 to 1 cycle on ev6 (a bit more on ev56)
depending on instruction slotting.
Note that superfluous mb's around atomic stuff still can hurt -
Alpha mb instruction also flushes IO write buffers, so it can
be _extremely_ expensive under heavy IO...
Ivan.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[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]
