Christoph Lameter wrote on Thursday, March 30, 2006 5:38 PM > > Christoph Lameter wrote on Thursday, March 30, 2006 5:13 PM > > > Then there will no barrier since clear_bit only has acquire semantics. > > > This is a bug in bit operations since smb_mb__before_clear_bit does > > > not work as documentted. > > > > Well, please make up your mind with: > > > > Option (1): > > > > #define clear_bit clear_bit_mode(..., RELEASE) > > #define Smp_mb__before_clear_bit do { } while (0) > > #define Smp_mb__after_clear_bit smp_mb() > > > > Or option (2): > > > > #define clear_bit clear_bit_mode(..., ACQUIRE) > > #define Smp_mb__before_clear_bit smp_mb() > > #define Smp_mb__after_clear_bit do { } while (0) > > > > I'm fine with either one. > > Neither one is correct because there will always be one combination of > clear_bit with these macros that does not generate the required memory > barrier. Can you give an example? Which combination? - 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.htmlReceived on Fri Mar 31 13:35:44 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2006-03-31 13:35:53 EST