search for: membar_saf

Displaying 8 results from an estimated 8 matches for "membar_saf".

Did you mean: membar_safe
2015 Dec 30
0
[PATCH 07/34] sparc: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h
...;ba,pt %%xcc, 1f\n\t" \ #define rmb() __asm__ __volatile__("":::"memory") #define wmb() __asm__ __volatile__("":::"memory") -#define dma_rmb() rmb() -#define dma_wmb() wmb() - -#define smp_store_mb(__var, __value) \ - do { WRITE_ONCE(__var, __value); membar_safe("#StoreLoad"); } while(0) - -#ifdef CONFIG_SMP -#define smp_mb() mb() -#define smp_rmb() rmb() -#define smp_wmb() wmb() -#else -#define smp_mb() __asm__ __volatile__("":::"memory") -#define smp_rmb() __asm__ __volatile__("":::"memory") -#define smp...
2015 Dec 31
0
[PATCH v2 07/32] sparc: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h
...;ba,pt %%xcc, 1f\n\t" \ #define rmb() __asm__ __volatile__("":::"memory") #define wmb() __asm__ __volatile__("":::"memory") -#define dma_rmb() rmb() -#define dma_wmb() wmb() - -#define smp_store_mb(__var, __value) \ - do { WRITE_ONCE(__var, __value); membar_safe("#StoreLoad"); } while(0) - -#ifdef CONFIG_SMP -#define smp_mb() mb() -#define smp_rmb() rmb() -#define smp_wmb() wmb() -#else -#define smp_mb() __asm__ __volatile__("":::"memory") -#define smp_rmb() __asm__ __volatile__("":::"memory") -#define smp...
2015 Dec 30
46
[PATCH 00/34] arch: barrier cleanup + __smp_XXX barriers for virt
This is really trying to cleanup some virt code, as suggested by Peter, who said > You could of course go fix that instead of mutilating things into > sort-of functional state. This work is needed for virtio, so it's probably easiest to merge it through my tree - is this fine by everyone? Arnd, if you agree, could you ack this please? Note to arch maintainers: please don't
2015 Dec 30
46
[PATCH 00/34] arch: barrier cleanup + __smp_XXX barriers for virt
This is really trying to cleanup some virt code, as suggested by Peter, who said > You could of course go fix that instead of mutilating things into > sort-of functional state. This work is needed for virtio, so it's probably easiest to merge it through my tree - is this fine by everyone? Arnd, if you agree, could you ack this please? Note to arch maintainers: please don't
2016 Jan 10
48
[PATCH v3 00/41] arch: barrier cleanup + barriers for virt
Changes since v2: - extended checkpatch tests for barriers, and added patches teaching it to warn about incorrect usage of barriers (__smp_xxx barriers are for use by asm-generic code only), should help prevent misuse by arch code to address comments by Russell King - patched more instances of xen to use virt_ barriers as suggested by Stefano Stabellini - implemented a 2 byte xchg on sh
2016 Jan 10
48
[PATCH v3 00/41] arch: barrier cleanup + barriers for virt
Changes since v2: - extended checkpatch tests for barriers, and added patches teaching it to warn about incorrect usage of barriers (__smp_xxx barriers are for use by asm-generic code only), should help prevent misuse by arch code to address comments by Russell King - patched more instances of xen to use virt_ barriers as suggested by Stefano Stabellini - implemented a 2 byte xchg on sh
2015 Dec 31
54
[PATCH v2 00/34] arch: barrier cleanup + barriers for virt
Changes since v1: - replaced my asm-generic patch with an equivalent patch already in tip - add wrappers with virt_ prefix for better code annotation, as suggested by David Miller - dropped XXX in patch names as this makes vger choke, Cc all relevant mailing lists on all patches (not personal email, as the list becomes too long then) I parked this in vhost tree for now, but the
2015 Dec 31
54
[PATCH v2 00/34] arch: barrier cleanup + barriers for virt
Changes since v1: - replaced my asm-generic patch with an equivalent patch already in tip - add wrappers with virt_ prefix for better code annotation, as suggested by David Miller - dropped XXX in patch names as this makes vger choke, Cc all relevant mailing lists on all patches (not personal email, as the list becomes too long then) I parked this in vhost tree for now, but the