On 2018-03-26 07:44, Will Deacon wrote:
Hi Ben,
I don't seem to have the beginning of this thread, so please bounce it
over
if you'd like me to look at it!
https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rdma/msg62570.html
https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rdma/index.html#62666
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 11:16:08AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2018-03-22 at 12:51 -0500, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> On 3/22/2018 8:52 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > > No, it's not sufficient.
> >
> > Just to clarify ... barrier() is just a compiler barrier, it means the
> > compiler will generate things in the order they are written. This isn't
> > sufficient on archs with an OO memory model, where an actual memory
> > barrier instruction needs to be emited.
>
> Surprisingly, ARM64 GCC compiler generates a write barrier as
> opposed to preventing code reordering.
In context, this looks like a misunderstanding somewhere. barrier() is
a
compiler barrier for us just like everybody else and we use the generic
implementation with the empty asm + memory clobber.
True, I clarified it this weekend
https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rdma/msg62788.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
