On May 24, 2012, at 3:46 PM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > On 05/24/12 17:22, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: >> >> On May 24, 2012, at 3:15 PM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: >> >>>>> Summary: >>>>> 1. *mb() must be lwsync or sync on all machines, except for wmb() which >>>>> could be eieio >>>>> 2. __ATOMIC_ACQ() must be isync (though could be reduced to lwsync with >>>>> bus_space changes) >>>>> 3. __ATOMIC_REL() must be lwsync or sync >>>> >>>> This is absolutely not what I concluded from our discussions. I have no >>>> idea >>>> how we could end up so out of sync... >>>> >>> >>> Thanks for the quick change. No idea how we got out of sync. I find all of >>> this synchronization stuff a little mind-bending, so sorry for any >>> miscommunication. __ATOMIC_ACQ() needed to also be isync on ppc64, so I've >>> fixed that up. Things should be good now. >> >> Ok. I didn't change wmb() to eieio as I wanted to avoid a pendulum effect. >> I'll reread our emails and make sure wmb() is what we think it is and if >> so I'll do a followup commit. >> FYI, >> > > I don't think it really makes a difference. Basically nothing uses wmb(), and > those things that do mostly use it wrong and need sync. So it should probably > stay as [lw]sync.
Works for me. Thanks! -- Marcel Moolenaar mar...@xcllnt.net _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
