On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 02:17:28 PST (-0800), parri.and...@gmail.com wrote:
Introduce __smp_{mb,rmb,wmb}, and rely on the generic definitions
for smp_{mb,rmb,wmb}. A first consequence is that smp_{mb,rmb,wmb}
map to a compiler barrier on !SMP (while their definition remains
unchanged on SMP). As a further consequence, smp_load_acquire and
smp_store_release have "fence rw,rw" instead of "fence iorw,iorw".

Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri <parri.and...@gmail.com>
---
 arch/riscv/include/asm/barrier.h | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/barrier.h
index c0319cbf1eec5..5510366d169ae 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/barrier.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/barrier.h
@@ -34,9 +34,9 @@
 #define wmb()          RISCV_FENCE(ow,ow)

 /* These barriers do not need to enforce ordering on devices, just memory. */
-#define smp_mb()       RISCV_FENCE(rw,rw)
-#define smp_rmb()      RISCV_FENCE(r,r)
-#define smp_wmb()      RISCV_FENCE(w,w)
+#define __smp_mb()     RISCV_FENCE(rw,rw)
+#define __smp_rmb()    RISCV_FENCE(r,r)
+#define __smp_wmb()    RISCV_FENCE(w,w)

 /*
  * This is a very specific barrier: it's currently only used in two places in

Thanks!  I'm going to take this for the next RC.

Reply via email to