Manfred> Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> atomic_foo() should be ordered, at least that the idea behind it as
>> far as I understand.
Manfred> That might be the idea, but that's not the implementation:
Manfred> Pentium III documentation: (24319201.pdf)
Right, intuitively I would expect an atomic operation to guarantee
read/write ordering though, however if this is not what we want, we
should at least document it.
Manfred> I've read that rmb() is expensive on RISC architectures, what
Manfred> about adding "get_?mb()" functions?
rmb() is still less expensive than plain mb().
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/