From: "Paul E. McKenney" <[email protected]> The transformation in the fold-to-zero example incorrectly omits the barrier() directive. This commit therefore adds it back in.
Reported-by: Pranith Kumar <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <[email protected]> --- Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 9 ++++++--- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt index d67c508eb660..600b45c6e2ad 100644 --- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt +++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt @@ -679,12 +679,15 @@ equal to zero, in which case the compiler is within its rights to transform the above code into the following: q = ACCESS_ONCE(a); + barrier(); ACCESS_ONCE(b) = p; do_something_else(); -This transformation loses the ordering between the load from variable 'a' -and the store to variable 'b'. If you are relying on this ordering, you -should do something like the following: +This transformation fails to require that the CPU respect the ordering +between the load from variable 'a' and the store to variable 'b'. +Yes, the barrier() is still there, but it affects only the compiler, +not the CPU. Therefore, if you are relying on this ordering, you should +do something like the following: q = ACCESS_ONCE(a); BUILD_BUG_ON(MAX <= 1); /* Order load from a with store to b. */ -- 1.8.1.5 -- 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/
