On Thu, 23 Apr 2015 14:43:40 +0100, Filipe Manana wrote: > I don't think a lock followed by unlock without nothing in between (be > it a spinlock, mutex, or any other kind of lock) will be seen by the > compiler as a nop. Pretty sure I've seen this pattern being done in the
No, I didn't say they would - that would be wrong. I just found it odd, that's all. > kernel and in many other places as mechanism to wait for something. I also completely forgot that spinlocks disable preemption, since otherwise nothing would really work. That's the real reason why any of this works. Well, that and the refcount==2 thing. Cool! Thanks! Holger -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
