Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
x86: wmb() confusion in system.h
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
Comment says wmb is a nop, but it is implemented as lock addl
below... Should it be compiled to nop if we know we are running on
"good" Intel cpu?

At least remove confusing comment for now.

Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
  • Loading branch information
Pavel Machek authored and Ingo Molnar committed Apr 17, 2008
1 parent 3c2047c commit 0d7a181
Showing 1 changed file with 1 addition and 10 deletions.
11 changes: 1 addition & 10 deletions include/asm-x86/system.h
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -296,16 +296,7 @@ void default_idle(void);
*/
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
/*
* For now, "wmb()" doesn't actually do anything, as all
* Intel CPU's follow what Intel calls a *Processor Order*,
* in which all writes are seen in the program order even
* outside the CPU.
*
* I expect future Intel CPU's to have a weaker ordering,
* but I'd also expect them to finally get their act together
* and add some real memory barriers if so.
*
* Some non intel clones support out of order store. wmb() ceases to be a
* Some non-Intel clones support out of order store. wmb() ceases to be a
* nop for these.
*/
#define mb() alternative("lock; addl $0,0(%%esp)", "mfence", X86_FEATURE_XMM2)
Expand Down

0 comments on commit 0d7a181

Please sign in to comment.