Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 24 Feb 2014 08:27:28 -0800 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: memory-barriers.txt again (was Re: [PATCH 4/9] firewire: don't use PREPARE_DELAYED_WORK) |
| |
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 01:32:54AM +0100, Stefan Richter wrote: > On Feb 23 Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >>> Please see below for a patch against the current version of > >>> Documentation/memory-barriers.txt. Does this update help? > > Thank you, this clarifies it. > > [...] > A new nit: > > +The operations will always occur in one of the following orders: > > > > - STORE *A, RELEASE, ACQUIRE, STORE *B > > - STORE *A, ACQUIRE, RELEASE, STORE *B > > + STORE *A, RELEASE, ACQUIRE, smp_mb__after_unlock_lock(), STORE *B > > + STORE *A, ACQUIRE, RELEASE, smp_mb__after_unlock_lock(), STORE *B > > + ACQUIRE, STORE *A, RELEASE, smp_mb__after_unlock_lock(), STORE *B > > > > -If the RELEASE and ACQUIRE were instead both operating on the same lock > > -variable, only the first of these two alternatives can occur. > > +If the RELEASE and ACQUIRE were instead both operating on the > > +same lock variable, only the first of these two alternatives can > > +occur. > ^^^ > ...these {,three} alternatives...
Good catch! I chose the empty string.
Thanx, Paul
|  |