From: Ralf Baechle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 21:49:46 +0000
> I believe all the below memory barriers only matter on SMP so therefore > the smp_* variant of the barrier should be used. > > I'm wondering if the barrier in net/ipv4/inet_timewait_sock.c should be > dropped entirely. schedule_work's implementation currently implies a > memory barrier and I think sane semantics of schedule_work() should imply > a memory barrier, as needed so the caller shouldn't have to worry. > It's not quite obvious why the barrier in net/packet/af_packet.c is > needed; maybe it should be implied through flush_dcache_page? > > Ralf > > Signed-off-by: Ralf Baechle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Ok, Ralf this looks good, and I think your suspicions are correct about the timewait case, I'll just delete that memory barrier. I put it there and aparently for now justifiable reason :-) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
