On Fri, 31 Mar 2006, Chen, Kenneth W wrote:
> > They are not. They provide equivalent barrier when performed
> > before/after a clear_bit, there is a big difference.
>
> Just to give another blunt brutal example, what is said here is equivalent
> to say kernel requires:
>
> <end of critical section>
> smp_mb_before_spin_unlock
> spin_unlock
>
> Because it is undesirable to have spin_unlock to leak into the critical
> Section and allow critical section to leak after spin_unlock. This is
> just plain brain dead.
I think we could say that lock semantics are different from barriers. They
are more like acquire and release on IA64. The problem with smb_mb_*** is
that the coder *explicitly* requested a barrier operation and we do not
give it to him.
-
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]
