On Sun, 22 Oct 2006, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> How about ld_i(A) => ld_j(A)? This would say that both loads corresponded
> to the same store.
> > How about this instead: "A==>B" means that B sees the value stored by A,
> > and "A==B" means that A and B are both loads and they see the value from
> > the same store. That way we avoid putting a load on the left side of
> > "==>".
>
> My concern is that "==" might also have connotations of equal values from
> distinct stores.
Okay, here's another suggestion: ld_i(A) <=> ld_j(A). This avoids
connotations of ordering and indicates the symmetry of the relation: both
loads return data from the same store.
Alan
-
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]
