On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 09:15:38AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Waiman Long <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I thought that all atomic RMW instructions are memory barrier. > > On x86 they are. Not necessarily elsewhere. > > > If they are not, what kind of barrier should be added? > > smp_mb__before_atomic_xyz() and smp_mb__after_atomic_xyz() will do it, > and are no-op (well, barriers - I don't think it matters) on x86.
Right, which on PPC are sync, whereas the release need only have lwsync. And ARM can actually do atomic_sub_release() but cannot do it with an additional smp_*__after() construct. Do we care enough to introduce atomic_sub_release() for them? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
