On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 07:09:22AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 02:48:00PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 05:41:42AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > Never mind, the PPC people will implement this with lwsync and that is > > > > very much not transitive IIRC. > > > > > > I am probably lost on context, but... > > > > > > It turns out that lwsync is transitive in special cases. One of them > > > is a series of release-acquire pairs, which can extend indefinitely. > > > > > > Does that help in this case? > > > > Probably not, but good to know. I still don't think we want to rely on > > ACQUIRE/RELEASE being transitive in general though. > > OK, I will bite... Why not?
It would mean us reviewing all archs (again) and documenting it I suppose. Which is of course entirely possible. That said, I don't think the case at hand requires it, so lets postpone this for now ;-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
