xiaomi-sm8450/android_kernel_xiaomi_sm8450
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

arch: Cleanup read_barrier_depends() and comments

Browse Source 
This patch is meant to cleanup the handling of read_barrier_depends and
smp_read_barrier_depends.  In multiple spots in the kernel headers
read_barrier_depends is defined as "do {} while (0)", however we then go
into the SMP vs non-SMP sections and have the SMP version reference
read_barrier_depends, and the non-SMP define it as yet another empty
do/while.

With this commit I went through and cleaned out the duplicate definitions
and reduced the number of definitions down to 2 per header.  In addition I
moved the 50 line comments for the macro from the x86 and mips headers that
defined it as an empty do/while to those that were actually defining the
macro, alpha and blackfin.

Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
This commit is contained in:
Alexander Duyck
2014-12-11 15:01:55 -08:00
committed by David S. Miller
parent c11a9009ae
commit 8a44971841
10 changed files with 129 additions and 135 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

52
arch/mips/include/asm/barrier.h
View File

@@ -10,58 +10,6 @@
#include <asm/addrspace.h>
/*
* read_barrier_depends - Flush all pending reads that subsequents reads
* depend on.
*
* No data-dependent reads from memory-like regions are ever reordered
* over this barrier. All reads preceding this primitive are guaranteed
* to access memory (but not necessarily other CPUs' caches) before any
* reads following this primitive that depend on the data return by
* any of the preceding reads. This primitive is much lighter weight than
* rmb() on most CPUs, and is never heavier weight than is
* rmb().
*
* These ordering constraints are respected by both the local CPU
* and the compiler.
*
* Ordering is not guaranteed by anything other than these primitives,
* not even by data dependencies. See the documentation for
* memory_barrier() for examples and URLs to more information.
*
* For example, the following code would force ordering (the initial
* value of "a" is zero, "b" is one, and "p" is "&a"):
*
* <programlisting>
* CPU 0 CPU 1
*
* b = 2;
* memory_barrier();
* p = &b; q = p;
* read_barrier_depends();
* d = *q;
* </programlisting>
*
* because the read of "*q" depends on the read of "p" and these
* two reads are separated by a read_barrier_depends(). However,
* the following code, with the same initial values for "a" and "b":
*
* <programlisting>
* CPU 0 CPU 1
*
* a = 2;
* memory_barrier();
* b = 3; y = b;
* read_barrier_depends();
* x = a;
* </programlisting>
*
* does not enforce ordering, since there is no data dependency between
* the read of "a" and the read of "b". Therefore, on some CPUs, such
* as Alpha, "y" could be set to 3 and "x" to 0. Use rmb()
* in cases like this where there are no data dependencies.
*/
#define read_barrier_depends() do { } while(0)
#define smp_read_barrier_depends() do { } while(0)