On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 04:46:22PM +0000, David Howells wrote: > > The best way to do this is with > > +io_lock and io_unlock barriers, which directs the critical section to order > > +IO access as well. For example: > > Should there be a spin_lock_io() for example? Then we need ... spin_lock_irqsave_io() spin_lock_irq_io() spin_lock_bh_io() spin_trylock_io() spin_trylock_irqsave_io() spin_trylock_irq_io() spin_trylock_bh_io() ditto with write_ and read_. Maybe double_spin_lock_io too. That's an extra 25 primitives (oh, plus the unlocks; 28). -- Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step." - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
