On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 11:21:38AM +, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Andrea,
>
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 07:45:56PM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote:
> > Continuing along with the fight against smp_read_barrier_depends() [1]
> > (or rather, against its improper use), add an unconditional barrier to
> > cmpx
Hi Andrea,
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 07:45:56PM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote:
> Continuing along with the fight against smp_read_barrier_depends() [1]
> (or rather, against its improper use), add an unconditional barrier to
> cmpxchg. This guarantees that dependency ordering is preserved when a
> depe
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 07:45:56PM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote:
> Continuing along with the fight against smp_read_barrier_depends() [1]
> (or rather, against its improper use), add an unconditional barrier to
> cmpxchg. This guarantees that dependency ordering is preserved when a
> dependency is he
Continuing along with the fight against smp_read_barrier_depends() [1]
(or rather, against its improper use), add an unconditional barrier to
cmpxchg. This guarantees that dependency ordering is preserved when a
dependency is headed by an unsuccessful cmpxchg. As it turns out, the
change could en
4 matches
Mail list logo