* Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The flip side is that if the MFENCE stalls the STAC that is ahead of it could be > > processed for 'free' - while it's always post barrier with my suggestion. > > This 'for free' aspect is what I aiming for. Ok. > > > > But in any case it would be nice to see a discussion of this aspect in the > > changelog, even if the patch does not change. > > I'll add a note to the changelog that having the fence after the > 'stac' hopefully allows some overlap of the cost of 'stac' and the > flushing of the instruction pipeline. Perfect! Thanks, Ingo
