Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759824AbYHULr4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Aug 2008 07:47:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758761AbYHULrs (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Aug 2008 07:47:48 -0400 Received: from e36.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.154]:53901 "EHLO e36.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757514AbYHULrs (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Aug 2008 07:47:48 -0400 Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 04:47:45 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Stefan Richter , jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Nick Piggin , David Howells Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] mdb: Merkey's Linux Kernel Debugger 2.6.27-rc4 released Message-ID: <20080821114745.GD21089@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <200808210250.m7L2obNX028353@wolfmountaingroup.com> <1219313231.8651.101.camel@twins> <48AD4A0B.8020805@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <1219316568.8651.107.camel@twins> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1219316568.8651.107.camel@twins> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15+20070412 (2007-04-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1448 Lines: 33 On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 01:02:48PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 12:57 +0200, Stefan Richter wrote: > > Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Wed, 2008-08-20 at 20:50 -0600, jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote: > > > > > >> volatiles left in the code due to the previously stated > > >> (and still present) severe breakage of the GNU compiler with SMP > > >> shared data. most of the barrier() functions are just plain broken > > >> and do not result in proper compiler behavior in this tree. > > > > > > Can you provide explicit detail? > > > > > > By using barrier() the compiler should clobber all its memory and > > > registers therefore forcing a write/reload of the variable. > > > > I hope Jeff didn't try mere barrier()s only. smp_wmb() and smp_rmb() > > are the more relevant barrier variants for mdb, from what I remember > > when I last looked at it. > > Sure, but volatile isn't a replacement for memory barriers. Let's face it, the C standard does not support concurrency, so we are all in a state of sin in any case, forced to rely on combinations of gcc-specific non-standard language extensions and assembly language. Could be worse!!! Thanx, Paul -- 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/