On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 07:23:49PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >This can't be right. Together 1 and 2 would obviate the need for
> >wmb().
> >The CPU doing "STORE A; STORE B" will always see the operations
> >occuring
> >in program order by 1, and hence every other CPU would always see them
> >occurring in the same order by 2 -- even without wmb().
> >
> >Either 2 is too strong, or else what you mean by "perceived" isn't
> >sufficiently clear.
>
> 2. is only for multiple stores to a _single_ memory location -- you
> use wmb() to order stores to _separate_ memory locations.
Precisely!!!
Thanx, Paul
-
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]
