On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 02:43:29PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote: > Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> writes: > >> > +/* > >> > + * Am I reading these CAS loops right in that %2 is the old value and > >> > the first > >> > + * iteration uses an uninitialized value? > >> > + * > >> > + * Would it not make sense to add: tmp = atomic_read(v); to avoid this? > >> > + */
> No, there is nothing to fix here. OK, care to elucidate? Clearly I need help reading this. I'm more than happy to remove the comment, but I would like to better understand.
