On Friday 28 April 2006 08:27, Chris Wright wrote:
> * Andi Kleen ([email protected]) wrote:
> > On Friday 28 April 2006 07:23, Chris Wright wrote:
> > > * Andi Kleen ([email protected]) wrote:
> > > > > +static inline void pmd_clear(pmd_t *pmd)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + u32 *tmp = (u32 *)pmd;
> > > > > + *tmp = 0;
> > > > > + smp_wmb();
> > > > > + *(tmp + 1) = 0;
> > > > > +}
> > > >
> > > > I think that's still wrong - it should be wmb() not smp_wmb because this
> > > > problem can happen on a UP kernel already.
> > >
> > > I thought the barrier is to keep compiler from reordering not processor.
> >
> > Yes, but with smp_wmb() it will go away on UP. And even on UP the
> > CPU is free to speculate.
>
> I must be confused. Doesn't that become a barrier() on UP?
No it was me who was confused sorry. Somehow i thought it was defined
away for !SMP
(which would make sense because why would you want a compile barrier
for a barrier that is only needed on SMP?)
-Andi
-
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]
