Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753635AbZJ0LBx (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:01:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753110AbZJ0LBw (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:01:52 -0400 Received: from ns2.intersolute.de ([193.110.43.67]:33926 "EHLO ns2.intersolute.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752996AbZJ0LBw (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:01:52 -0400 Message-ID: <4AE6D312.9040803@lumino.de> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:01:38 +0100 From: Michael Schnell User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Leonidas ." CC: Stefan Richter , Noah Watkins , linux-kernel Subject: Re: Difference between atomic operations and memory barriers References: <7ADB5FD7-9C97-4987-BC20-997258B25FD2@noahdesu.com> <4AE5F1D2.9030908@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <4AE6C998.9040405@lumino.de> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 545 Lines: 15 Leonidas . wrote: > but pointer > assignment would still be atomic. > Yep. bit maybe the assignment to the memory cell that holds the pointer just would be optimized out and be done at all. This my be considered atomic but of course not desired for anything atomicness is considered for. -Michael -- 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/