On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 05:28:53PM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 02:35:52 PST (-0800), parri.and...@gmail.com wrote:
> >On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 03:14:52PM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> >>On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 02:17:28 PST (-0800), parri.and...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>Introduce __s
On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 02:35:52 PST (-0800), parri.and...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 03:14:52PM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 02:17:28 PST (-0800), parri.and...@gmail.com wrote:
>Introduce __smp_{mb,rmb,wmb}, and rely on the generic definitions
>for smp_{mb,rmb,wmb}
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 03:14:52PM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 02:17:28 PST (-0800), parri.and...@gmail.com wrote:
> >Introduce __smp_{mb,rmb,wmb}, and rely on the generic definitions
> >for smp_{mb,rmb,wmb}. A first consequence is that smp_{mb,rmb,wmb}
> >map to a compiler b
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 02:17:28 PST (-0800), parri.and...@gmail.com wrote:
Introduce __smp_{mb,rmb,wmb}, and rely on the generic definitions
for smp_{mb,rmb,wmb}. A first consequence is that smp_{mb,rmb,wmb}
map to a compiler barrier on !SMP (while their definition remains
unchanged on SMP). As a fu
Introduce __smp_{mb,rmb,wmb}, and rely on the generic definitions
for smp_{mb,rmb,wmb}. A first consequence is that smp_{mb,rmb,wmb}
map to a compiler barrier on !SMP (while their definition remains
unchanged on SMP). As a further consequence, smp_load_acquire and
smp_store_release have "fence rw,r
5 matches
Mail list logo