Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755954Ab1BQMwa (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Feb 2011 07:52:30 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:53520 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753448Ab1BQMw3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Feb 2011 07:52:29 -0500 Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 13:51:45 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt , David Miller , simoneau@ele.uri.edu, will.newton@gmail.com, matt@console-pimps.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, peterz@infradead.org, jbaron@redhat.com, mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca, tglx@linutronix.de, andi@firstfloor.org, roland@redhat.com, rth@redhat.com, masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, avi@redhat.com, sam@ravnborg.org, ddaney@caviumnetworks.com, michael@ellerman.id.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vapier@gentoo.org, cmetcalf@tilera.com, dhowells@redhat.com, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] jump label: 2.6.38 updates Message-ID: <20110217125145.GB27504@elte.hu> References: <4D59B891.8010300@zytor.com> <20110215211123.GA3094@ele.uri.edu> <20110215.132702.39199169.davem@davemloft.net> <1297808418.2460.9.camel@pasglop> <20110216083542.GE16529@elte.hu> <4D5C7418.4080307@zytor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4D5C7418.4080307@zytor.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 817 Lines: 23 * H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 02/16/2011 12:35 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > Just curious: how does this work if there's an interrupt (or NMI) right after the > > invalidate instruction but before the 'll' instruction? The IRQ/NMI may refill the > > L1. Or are the two instructions coupled by hw (they form a single instruction in > > essence) and irqs/NMIs are inhibited inbetween? > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load-link/store-conditional Oh, ll/sc, that indeed clicks - i even wrote such assembly code many years ago ;-) Thanks, Ingo -- 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/