redonkable
/
alistair23-linux
1
0
Fork 0
Code Releases Activity

documentation: Fix control dependency and identical stores 

The summary of the "CONTROL DEPENDENCIES" section incorrectly states that
barrier() may be used to prevent compiler reordering when more than one
leg of the control-dependent "if" statement start with identical stores.
This is incorrect at high optimization levels.  This commit therefore
updates the summary to match the detailed description.

Reported by: Jianyu Zhan <nasa4836@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
hifive-unleashed-5.1
Paul E. McKenney 2015-12-29 16:23:18 -08:00
parent 92e963f50f
commit 7817b799ed
1 changed files with 7 additions and 3 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

10
Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
View File

@ -800,9 +800,13 @@ In summary:
use smp_rmb(), smp_wmb(), or, in the case of prior stores and
later loads, smp_mb().
(*) If both legs of the "if" statement begin with identical stores
to the same variable, a barrier() statement is required at the
beginning of each leg of the "if" statement.
(*) If both legs of the "if" statement begin with identical stores to
the same variable, then those stores must be ordered, either by
preceding both of them with smp_mb() or by using smp_store_release()
to carry out the stores. Please note that it is -not- sufficient
to use barrier() at beginning of each leg of the "if" statement,
as optimizing compilers do not necessarily respect barrier()
in this case.
(*) Control dependencies require at least one run-time conditional
between the prior load and the subsequent store, and this