Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751078AbWCaBMz (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Mar 2006 20:12:55 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751172AbWCaBMy (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Mar 2006 20:12:54 -0500 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]:63154 "EHLO azsmga101-1.ch.intel.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751078AbWCaBMx (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Mar 2006 20:12:53 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.03,148,1141632000"; d="scan'208"; a="17153827:sNHT52341387" Message-Id: <200603310112.k2V1Cpg27150@unix-os.sc.intel.com> From: "Chen, Kenneth W" To: "'Christoph Lameter'" Cc: "Nick Piggin" , "Zoltan Menyhart" , "Boehm, Hans" , "Grundler, Grant G" , , , Subject: RE: Synchronizing Bit operations V2 Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 17:13:35 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Thread-Index: AcZUX97hQI02AVNuRMGqurYY24wRCQAADY8g In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 752 Lines: 16 Christoph Lameter wrote on Thursday, March 30, 2006 5:09 PM > In general yes the caller should not be thinking about clear_bit having > any memory ordering at all. However for IA64 arch specific code the bit > operations must have a certain ordering semantic and it would be best that > these are also consistent. clear_bit is not a lock operation and may > f.e. be used for locking something. OK, fine. Then please don't change smp_mb__after_clear_bit() for ia64. i.e., leave it alone as noop. - Ken - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/