On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 02:26:54PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > I think a simple smp_mb(); here after foo = 1; is enough, which means > basically just having an smp_mp(); inside napi_synchronize(), before > the test_bit(). Or do I miss something ?
Yes I think you're right. In this case we do have barriers everywhere else so this should work. Although if you want napi_synchronize to have the property that when it returns all NAPI processing effects are visible then you'd need another smp_mb() after the loop. Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
