Re: [PATCH RFC 0/4] barriers using data dependency

2019-01-03 Thread Alan Stern
On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 04:36:40PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > > On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > > So as explained in Documentation/memory-barriers.txt e.g. > > > a load followed by a store require a full memory barrier, > > > t

Re: [PATCH RFC 0/4] barriers using data dependency

2019-01-02 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 04:36:40PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > So as explained in Documentation/memory-barriers.txt e.g. > > a load followed by a store require a full memory barrier, > > to avoid store being ordered before the load. > > Similarly

Re: [PATCH RFC 0/4] barriers using data dependency

2019-01-02 Thread Alan Stern
On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > So as explained in Documentation/memory-barriers.txt e.g. > a load followed by a store require a full memory barrier, > to avoid store being ordered before the load. > Similarly load-load requires a read memory barrier. > > Thinking about it, we can

[PATCH RFC 0/4] barriers using data dependency

2019-01-02 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
So as explained in Documentation/memory-barriers.txt e.g. a load followed by a store require a full memory barrier, to avoid store being ordered before the load. Similarly load-load requires a read memory barrier. Thinking about it, we can actually create a data dependency by mixing the first load