On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 05:34:07PM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 06:07:57PM -0400, John David Anglin wrote: > > There are two reasons to expose the memory *a in the asm: > > > > 1) To prevent the compiler from discarding a preceeding write to *a, and > > 2) to prevent it from caching *a in a register over the asm. > > Do either of those scenarios apply, given that every usage of this is > preceded by an asm clobbering memory? > > I believe the correct thing to do is to take out the two mb()s in the > various spin_lock routines and make the __ldcw() macro itself clobber > memory. I agree. Do you want jda to submit another patch or did you want kyle to take jda's patch and apply a second one to remove the mb()'s? thanks. grant > > -- > 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-parisc" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
