On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 07:19:04AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> Please forgive me for the format of my reply. I'm travelling,
> and replying from my phone.
>
> 2015年10月1日 下午7:28，"Peter Zijlstra" 写道：
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:49:34PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > > According to
Hi Peter,
Please forgive me for the format of my reply. I'm travelling,
and replying from my phone.
2015年10月1日 下午7:28，"Peter Zijlstra" 写道：
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:49:34PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > According to memory-barriers.txt, xchg and its atomic{,64}_ versions
> > need to imply a f
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:49:34PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> According to memory-barriers.txt, xchg and its atomic{,64}_ versions
> need to imply a full barrier, however they are now just RELEASE+ACQUIRE,
> which is not a full barrier.
>
> So remove the definition of xchg(), and let __atomic_op_f
According to memory-barriers.txt, xchg and its atomic{,64}_ versions
need to imply a full barrier, however they are now just RELEASE+ACQUIRE,
which is not a full barrier.
So remove the definition of xchg(), and let __atomic_op_fence() build
the full-barrier versions of these operations.
Signed-of
