On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 05:13:36PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > Understood, but that doesn't explain why Paul wants to add ISB/isync > instructions which affect the *CPU* rather than the compiler!
I doubt Paul wants it, but yeah, I'm curious about that proposal as well, sounds like someone took a big toke from the bong again; it seems a favourite past time amongst committees.
