On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 22:35 +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: > Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Note that some kind of read barrier or compiler barrier should be needed > > regardless, or we are just not sync'ing with anything at all (we may > > have loaded the value ages ago and thus operate on a totally stale > > value). I prefer a full barrier to also ensure all previous stores are > > pushed out. > > We already have a compiler barrier there in the form of cpu_relax.
Isn't it too late ? The barrier should be before the test_bit, to prevent it from moving up. Ben. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
