documentation: Fix control dependency and identical stores

The summary of the "CONTROL DEPENDENCIES" section incorrectly states that
barrier() may be used to prevent compiler reordering when more than one
leg of the control-dependent "if" statement start with identical stores.
This is incorrect at high optimization levels.  This commit therefore
updates the summary to match the detailed description.

Reported by: Jianyu Zhan <nasa4836@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
This commit is contained in:
Paul E. McKenney 2015-12-29 16:23:18 -08:00
Родитель 92e963f50f
Коммит 7817b799ed
1 изменённых файлов: 7 добавлений и 3 удалений

Просмотреть файл

@ -800,9 +800,13 @@ In summary:
use smp_rmb(), smp_wmb(), or, in the case of prior stores and use smp_rmb(), smp_wmb(), or, in the case of prior stores and
later loads, smp_mb(). later loads, smp_mb().
(*) If both legs of the "if" statement begin with identical stores (*) If both legs of the "if" statement begin with identical stores to
to the same variable, a barrier() statement is required at the the same variable, then those stores must be ordered, either by
beginning of each leg of the "if" statement. preceding both of them with smp_mb() or by using smp_store_release()
to carry out the stores. Please note that it is -not- sufficient
to use barrier() at beginning of each leg of the "if" statement,
as optimizing compilers do not necessarily respect barrier()
in this case.
(*) Control dependencies require at least one run-time conditional (*) Control dependencies require at least one run-time conditional
between the prior load and the subsequent store, and this between the prior load and the subsequent store, and this