Re: [PATCH 6/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently on frv

On Sat, Aug 11, 2007 at 08:54:46AM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Chris Snook <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> > cpu_relax() contains a barrier, so it should do the right thing.  For 
> > non-smp architectures, I'm concerned about interacting with interrupt 
> > handlers.  Some drivers do use atomic_* operations.
> 
> What problems with interrupt handlers? Access to int/long must
> be atomic or we're in big trouble anyway.

Reordering due to compiler optimizations.  CPU reordering does not
affect interactions with interrupt handlers on a given CPU, but
reordering due to compiler code-movement optimization does.  Since
volatile can in some cases suppress code-movement optimizations,
it can affect interactions with interrupt handlers.

						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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH 6/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently on frv
    • From: Herbert Xu <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Re: [PATCH 6/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently on frv
    • From: Chris Snook <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 6/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently on frv
    • From: Herbert Xu <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [SCSI] aic94xx: new driver
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently on alpha
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 6/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently on frv
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 6/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently on frv
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]