Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "smp_mb__after_unlock_lock".
2016 Jan 26
1
[v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h
...; > Now that you mention it, maybe it would be best to keep the transitive
> > and non-transitive separate for the time being anyway. Just because it
> > might be possible to deal with does not necessarily mean that we should
> > be encouraging it. ;-)
>
> So isn't smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() exactly such a scenario? And would
> not someone trying to implement RCsc locks using locally transitive
> RELEASE/ACQUIRE operations need exactly this stuff?
>
> That is, I am afraid we need to cover the mix of local and global
> transitive operations at least in overview.
True,...
2016 Jan 26
1
[v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h
...; > Now that you mention it, maybe it would be best to keep the transitive
> > and non-transitive separate for the time being anyway. Just because it
> > might be possible to deal with does not necessarily mean that we should
> > be encouraging it. ;-)
>
> So isn't smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() exactly such a scenario? And would
> not someone trying to implement RCsc locks using locally transitive
> RELEASE/ACQUIRE operations need exactly this stuff?
>
> That is, I am afraid we need to cover the mix of local and global
> transitive operations at least in overview.
True,...
2016 Jan 26
5
[v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:42:43PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 01:58:53PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:27:14PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:46:12AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:13:48AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >
> >
2016 Jan 26
5
[v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:42:43PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 01:58:53PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:27:14PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:46:12AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:13:48AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >
> >
2016 Jan 26
0
[v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h
...; > memory model?
>
> Now that you mention it, maybe it would be best to keep the transitive
> and non-transitive separate for the time being anyway. Just because it
> might be possible to deal with does not necessarily mean that we should
> be encouraging it. ;-)
So isn't smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() exactly such a scenario? And would
not someone trying to implement RCsc locks using locally transitive
RELEASE/ACQUIRE operations need exactly this stuff?
That is, I am afraid we need to cover the mix of local and global
transitive operations at least in overview.