RE: Fix unlock_buffer() to work the same way as bit_unlock()

From: Chen, Kenneth W <kenneth.w.chen_at_intel.com>
Date: 2006-03-29 05:53:52
Nick Piggin wrote on Tuesday, March 28, 2006 12:11 AM
> Also, I think there is still the issue of ia64 not having the
> correct memory consistency semantics. To start with, all the bitops
> and atomic ops which both modify their operand and return a value
> should be full memory barriers before and after the operation,
> according to Documentation/atomic_ops.txt.


I suppose the usage of atomic ops is abused, it is used in both lock
and unlock path.  And it naturally suck because it now requires full
memory barrier.  A better way is to define 3 variants: one for lock
path, one for unlock path, and one with full memory fence.

- Ken
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Wed Mar 29 06:41:06 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2006-03-29 06:41:15 EST