Thread (305 messages) 305 messages, 27 authors, 2007-09-11

Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures

From: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: 2007-08-16 00:53:25
Also in: linux-arch, lkml

On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 06:28:42AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
quoted
The udelay itself certainly should have some form of cpu_relax in it.
Yes, a form of barrier() must be present in mdelay() or udelay() itself
as you say, having it in __const_udelay() is *not* enough (superflous
actually, considering it is already a separate translation unit and
invisible to the compiler).
As long as __const_udelay does something which has the same
effect as barrier it is enough even if it's in the same unit.
As a matter of fact it does on i386 where __delay either uses
rep_nop or asm/volatile.

Cheers,
-- 
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} [off-list ref]
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help