Am Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 02:45:46AM + schrieb David Holland:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 03:12:29AM +0100, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > Am Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 02:01:13AM + schrieb David Holland:
> > > In this case I would argue that the names should be membar_load_any()
> > > and
On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 03:12:29AM +0100, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> Am Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 02:01:13AM + schrieb David Holland:
> > In this case I would argue that the names should be membar_load_any()
> > and membar_any_store().
>
> Kind of like with the BUSDMA_* flags, it is not
Am Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 02:01:13AM + schrieb David Holland:
> In this case I would argue that the names should be membar_load_any()
> and membar_any_store().
Kind of like with the BUSDMA_* flags, it is not clear from that name in
which direction they work either. As in: is it a barrier that
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 01:33:04PM +, Taylor R Campbell wrote:
> membar_enter is currently documented to be a store-before-load/store
> barrier: https://man.netbsd.org/NetBSD-9.2/membar_ops.3
>
> membar_enter()
>Any store preceding membar_enter() will happen before all
