On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 10:04:06PM +1100, Anton Blanchard wrote:
For performance reasons we are about to change ISYNC_ON_SMP to sometimes be
lwsync. Now that the macro name doesn't make sense, change it and
LWSYNC_ON_SMP
to better explain what the barriers are doing.
Signed-off-by: Anton
On Fri, 2010-03-19 at 12:08 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
- ISYNC_ON_SMP
+ PPC_ACQUIRE_BARRIER
I wonder if this shouldn't be called PPC_ISYNC_ACQUIRE_BARRIER ?
Unlike PPC_RELEASE_BARRIER, it is not an acquire barrier unless it
is used like an isync.
Right. The semantic of isync
For performance reasons we are about to change ISYNC_ON_SMP to sometimes be
lwsync. Now that the macro name doesn't make sense, change it and LWSYNC_ON_SMP
to better explain what the barriers are doing.
Signed-off-by: Anton Blanchard an...@samba.org
---
Index:
