On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Christian Borntraeger
<borntrae...@de.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Are you ok with the patch as is in kvm/next for the time being or shall
> we revert that and replace it with the .val scheme?
Is that the one that was quoted at the beginning of the thread, that
uses barrier()?
I guess as a workaround it is fine, as long as we don't lose sight of
trying to eventually do a better job.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
