Re: [Xen-devel] Linux questions

To:	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [Xen-devel] Linux questions
From:	Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Mon, 3 Dec 2007 12:29:58 +0100
Cc:	xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date:	Mon, 03 Dec 2007 03:30:37 -0800
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<4753F583.76E4.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx>
List-help:	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id:	Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post:	<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Mail-followup-to:	Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
References:	<4753F583.76E4.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent:	Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14

Jan Beulich, le Mon 03 Dec 2007 11:24:35 +0000, a écrit :
> 2) What is the reason for the inconsistent use of rmb() vs. barrier() in
> time-xen.c? It would seem to me that rmb() should be sufficient in all
> cases.

rmb() is more powerful than barrier(), not the converse.

Samuel

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Previous by Date:	[Xen-devel] Linux questions, Jan Beulich
Next by Date:	Re: [Xen-devel] Linux questions, Jan Beulich
Previous by Thread:	[Xen-devel] Linux questions, Jan Beulich
Next by Thread:	Re: [Xen-devel] Linux questions, Jan Beulich
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]

WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] Linux questions