On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 09:14:36AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > I just had this conversation with Paul McKenney. Should there be a > smp_mb_after_spin_unlock()?
Depends on the benefits I suppose :-) Oleg and Linus did recently add smp_mb__before_spinlock(); > Although we blew it off as adding too many extensions to smp_mb(). But > it may be better than reimplementing something as complex as a lock. Locks should be as light weight as possible and never implement anything heavier than the ACQUISITION / RELEASE barriers if at all possible. We should certainly not re-implement spinlocks just to get full barriers out of them, that's crazy. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
