Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753034AbXIHHhQ (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Sep 2007 03:37:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751738AbXIHHhD (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Sep 2007 03:37:03 -0400 Received: from smtp101.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([209.191.85.211]:30705 "HELO smtp101.mail.mud.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751386AbXIHHhB (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Sep 2007 03:37:01 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id; b=NRYNrLY6iXbEnztErIf8UTlL3/HMGhKebCOs9tDQtCIkvO8hmSOWDfKsfB9YGTwUfdAawRUEYA7VeMJiVG4+DoI7VbbBGpQDs8vaGO0vQGW0zNke6JFZflsytv1NhduR59W7pD713lHHUSdQulYHDQ2iFtvCZ4vCqIH4mZcJGmk= ; X-YMail-OSG: igrsRHEVM1lTKVusJYEf4ZoA2RVfBZLYqFn8a4nEXd5owSb7yXXzYKOBjw_WU8JdSNubKh91_rFNaeiHP1B47zplM4oREdR1XeJJMVEJD2oIlnTYcMQUz25dcCfQzA-- From: Nick Piggin To: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Intel Memory Ordering White Paper Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 03:34:27 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Cc: Jesse Barnes , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <200709071526.51169.jesse.barnes@intel.com> <200709081854.57549.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200709090334.27677.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 994 Lines: 23 On Saturday 08 September 2007 09:20, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sat, 8 Sep 2007, Nick Piggin wrote: > > So, can we finally noop smp_rmb and smp_wmb on x86? > > Did AMD already release their version? If so, we should probably add a > commit that does that in somewhat early 2.6.24 rc, and add the pointers to > the whitepapers in the commit message. http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/white_papers_and_tech_docs/24593.pdf AMD64 Architecture Programmer's Manual Volume 2: System Programming section 7.2: Multiprocessor Memory Access Ordering, a paragraph on the first page says "Loads do not pass previous loads (loads are not re-ordered). Stores do not pass previous stores (stores are not re-ordered)" So, yes, it should be easy to do. - 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/