On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 06:28:42AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote: > > > The udelay itself certainly should have some form of cpu_relax in it. > > Yes, a form of barrier() must be present in mdelay() or udelay() itself > as you say, having it in __const_udelay() is *not* enough (superflous > actually, considering it is already a separate translation unit and > invisible to the compiler).
As long as __const_udelay does something which has the same effect as barrier it is enough even if it's in the same unit. As a matter of fact it does on i386 where __delay either uses rep_nop or asm/volatile. 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 - 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
