On Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 08:37:15PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > On Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 12:14:12PM +0200, peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > To be accurate, atomic_set() doesn't return any value, so it cannot be > > > ordered against DR and DW ;-) > > > > Surely DW is valid for any store. > > > > IIUC, the DW colomn stands for whether the corresponding operation (in > this case, it's atomic_set()) is ordered any write that depends on this > operation. I don't think there is a write->write dependency, so DW for > atomic_set() should not be Y, just as the DW for WRITE_ONCE(). Ah, just shows I can't read I suppose ;-) I thought we were talking of the other side of the depency.
