On Friday 27 of August 2010 23:11:55 Luck, Tony wrote: > > One more idea. The wrap-around case is the only one when the high word is > > modified. This is in fact the only case when the fetchadd.acq competes > > with the st2.rel about the actual contents of that location. I don't know > > if it matters... > > I pondered that for a while - but I have difficulty believing that > fetchadd looks at which bits changed and only writes back the bytes > that did. OTOH the counter is only 15-bit, so it also wraps around at 0xfffe7fff, but I have never seen it fail there. It always fails after the wrap-around from 0xfffeffff. Petr Tesarik -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html