Re: [PATCH 6/8] i386: bitops: Don't mark memory as clobbered unnecessarily

[Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>]

On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 07:37 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 11:13 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > 
> > IOW, if you do a spinlock with the bitops, the locking side should be
> > able 
> > to use a "test_and_set_bit()" on its own, but the unlocking side
> > should be
> > 
> >         smp_mb__before_clear_bit();
> >         clear_bit();
> > 
> > because the ones that don't return a value also don't imply a memory 
> > barrier.
> 
> Yup. But I much prefer Nick's clear_bit_unlock() :-)
> 
> Ben

If you want to use bitops as spinlocks you should rather be using
<linux/bit_spinlock.h>. That also does the right thing w.r.t.
pre-emption and sparse locking annotations.

Trond

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/