Re: [PATCH v2 17/32] arm: define __smp_xxx
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 17/32] arm: define __smp_xxx
- From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2016 11:24:38 +0000
- Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>, linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-ia64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-s390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, sparclinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-metag@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, user-mode-linux-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, adi-buildroot-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-sh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-xtensa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@xxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <1451572003-2440-18-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
- List-id: <linux-ia64.vger.kernel.org>
- References: <1451572003-2440-1-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <1451572003-2440-18-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
- User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 09:07:59PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> This defines __smp_xxx barriers for arm,
> for use by virtualization.
>
> smp_xxx barriers are removed as they are
> defined correctly by asm-generic/barriers.h
>
> This reduces the amount of arch-specific boiler-plate code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
In combination with patch 14, this looks like it should result in no
change to the resulting code.
Acked-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
My only concern is that it gives people an additional handle onto a
"new" set of barriers - just because they're prefixed with __*
unfortunately doesn't stop anyone from using it (been there with
other arch stuff before.)
I wonder whether we should consider making the smp memory barriers
inline functions, so these __smp_xxx() variants can be undef'd
afterwards, thereby preventing drivers getting their hands on these
new macros?
--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
--
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
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Kernel]
[Sparc Linux]
[DCCP]
[Linux ARM]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux x86_64]
[Linux for Ham Radio]