Re: [Lse-tech] Re: RFC: patch to allow lock-free traversal of lists

[Linus Torvalds]

On Fri, 12 Oct 2001, Davide Libenzi wrote:
>
> Suppose that  p  and  *p  are on two different cache partitions and the
> invalidation order that comes from the wmb() cpu is 1) *p  2) p
> Suppose that the partition when  *p  lies is damn busy and the one where
> p  lies is free.
> The reader cpu could pickup the value of  p  before the value of  *p  by
> reading the old value of  a

Ahh.. I misunderstood. You are arguing for the rmb() even if the CPU
doesn't speculate addresses for loads. Yes, I agree.

		Linus