uml: use barrier() instead of mb()
commitfce8c41c9f68b9af36f3076bae8f1d469a6e7aab
authorJeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>
Tue, 5 Feb 2008 06:31:09 +0000 (4 22:31 -0800)
committerLinus Torvalds <torvalds@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Tue, 5 Feb 2008 17:44:29 +0000 (5 09:44 -0800)
tree3580fd114bcef42a898c838f5a58ddcb2d29ae99
parent0983a88b9f0ceffb2116ce92c7b273ce2aec7b93
uml: use barrier() instead of mb()

signals_enabled and pending have requirements on the order in which they are
modified.  This used to be done by declaring them volatile and putting an mb()
where the ordering requirements were in effect.

After getting a better (I hope) understanding of how to do this correctly, the
volatile declarations are gone and the mb()'s replaced by barrier()'s.

One of the mb()'s was deleted because I see no problematic writes that could
be re-ordered past that point.

Signed-off-by: Jeff Dike <jdike@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
arch/um/os-Linux/signal.c