Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 2 Jul 2015 07:40:10 +0200 | From | Heiko Carstens <> | Subject | Re: smp_store_mb() oddity.. |
| |
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 07:17:55PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > --- > Subject: locking/arch: Make smp_store_mb() use smp_mb() > > Linus noticed that there were a few smp_store_mb() implementations that > used mb(), which is inconsistent with the new naming. > > Since all smp_store_mb() users really are about SMP ordering, not IO > ordering, change them all to be consistent. > > Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com> > Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> > Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> > Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> > --- > diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h > index e6f8615a11eb..a4dea6050c77 100644 > --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h > +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h > @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ > #define smp_mb__before_atomic() smp_mb() > #define smp_mb__after_atomic() smp_mb() > > -#define smp_store_mb(var, value) do { WRITE_ONCE(var, value); mb(); } while (0) > +#define smp_store_mb(var, value) do { WRITE_ONCE(var, value); smp_mb(); } while (0) > > #define smp_store_release(p, v) \
for the s390 part: Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
| |