locking/x86: Tweak the comment about use of wmb() for IO

On x86, we *do* still use the non-NOP rmb()/wmb() for IO barriers,
but even that is generally questionable.

Leave them around as historial unless somebody can point to a
case where they care about the performance, but tweak the
comment so people don't think they are strictly required in all
cases.

Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Cc: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1453921746-16178-4-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h
index a291745..bfb28ca 100644 (file)
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
 
 /*
  * Force strict CPU ordering.
- * And yes, this is required on UP too when we're talking
+ * And yes, this might be required on UP too when we're talking
  * to devices.
  */