Files
linux/include/asm-x86
Nick Piggin 418ccbe37f x86: lock bitops
I missed an obvious one!

x86 CPUs are defined not to reorder stores past earlier loads, so there is
no hardware memory barrier required to implement a release-consistent store
(all stores are, by definition).

So ditch the generic lock bitops, and implement optimised versions for x86,
which removes the mfence from __clear_bit_unlock (which is already a useful
primitive for SLUB).

Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
2007-10-23 22:37:22 +02:00
..
2007-10-17 20:17:12 +02:00
2007-10-12 23:04:23 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:17:13 +02:00
2007-10-23 22:37:22 +02:00
2007-10-23 22:37:22 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:26:16 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:17:15 +02:00
2007-10-19 20:35:02 +02:00
2007-10-16 09:43:09 -07:00
2007-10-17 20:17:08 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:17:17 +02:00
2007-10-22 21:20:01 +02:00
2007-10-16 11:26:02 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:17:18 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:17:19 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:17:08 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:17:21 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:24:56 +02:00
2007-10-20 00:32:32 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:16:40 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:26:11 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:26:12 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:16:47 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:16:44 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:26:15 +02:00
2007-10-19 11:53:41 -07:00
2007-10-19 11:53:41 -07:00
2007-10-17 20:17:08 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:17:08 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:17:08 +02:00
2007-10-17 08:42:47 -07:00
2007-10-17 08:42:47 -07:00
2007-10-17 20:16:11 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:16:25 +02:00
2007-10-12 23:04:23 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:26:18 +02:00
2007-10-19 11:53:34 -07:00
2007-10-19 11:53:34 -07:00
2007-10-12 23:04:23 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:32:07 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:16:36 +02:00
2007-10-17 20:32:38 +02:00