documentation: memory-barriers: Fix smp_mb__before_spinlock() semantics
Our current documentation claims that, when followed by an ACQUIRE,
smp_mb__before_spinlock() orders prior loads against subsequent loads
and stores, which isn't the intent. This commit therefore fixes the
documentation to state that this sequence orders only prior stores
against subsequent loads and stores.
In addition, the original intent of smp_mb__before_spinlock() was to only
order prior loads against subsequent stores, however, people have started
using it as if it ordered prior loads against subsequent loads and stores.
This commit therefore also updates smp_mb__before_spinlock()'s header
comment to reflect this new reality.
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
index f957461..1f362fd 100644
--- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
+++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
@@ -1784,10 +1784,9 @@
Memory operations issued before the ACQUIRE may be completed after
the ACQUIRE operation has completed. An smp_mb__before_spinlock(),
- combined with a following ACQUIRE, orders prior loads against
- subsequent loads and stores and also orders prior stores against
- subsequent stores. Note that this is weaker than smp_mb()! The
- smp_mb__before_spinlock() primitive is free on many architectures.
+ combined with a following ACQUIRE, orders prior stores against
+ subsequent loads and stores. Note that this is weaker than smp_mb()!
+ The smp_mb__before_spinlock() primitive is free on many architectures.
(2) RELEASE operation implication: