> for (;;) {
> entry = mce_log_get_idx_check(mcelog.next);
Can't this get even simpler? Do we need the loop? The mutex
will now protect us while we check to see if there is a slot
to stash this new entry. Also just say:
entry = mcelog.next;
> for (;;) {
> @@ -66,10 +67,10 @@ static int dev_mce_log(struct notifier_block *nb,
> unsigned long val,
> * interesting ones:
> */
> if (entry >= MCE_LOG_LEN) {
> - set_bit(MCE_OVERFLOW,
> - (unsigned long *)&mcelog.flags);
> + set_bit(MCE_OVERFLOW, (unsigned long
> *)&mcelog.flags);
Need to mutex_unlock(&mce_chrdev_read_mutex); here.
> return NOTIFY_OK;
> }
> +
> /* Old left over entry. Skip: */
> if (mcelog.entry[entry].finished) {
> entry++;
> @@ -77,15 +78,13 @@ static int dev_mce_log(struct notifier_block *nb,
> unsigned long val,
> }
> break;
> }
> - smp_rmb();
> - next = entry + 1;
> - if (cmpxchg(&mcelog.next, entry, next) == entry)
> - break;
Ummm. Without this "break" how will we exit the loop (more fuel
for getting rid of the loop.
> + mcelog.next = entry + 1;
> }
-Tony
