Le 06/12/2019 à 17:53, Andrew Doran a écrit :
On Fri, Dec 06, 2019 at 05:22:39PM +0900, Kengo NAKAHARA wrote:/* Update the worker */ - worker_ci = hci; + atomic_swap_ptr(&worker_ci, hci);Why atomic_swap_ptr() not atomic_store_relaxed()? I don't see any bug that it fixes. Other than that it look OK to me.
Because I suggested it; my concern was that if not explicitly atomic, the cpu could make two writes internally (even though the compiler produces only one instruction), and in that case a page fault would have been possible because of garbage dereference. To be honest, I'm not totally sure whether it is a valid concern; theoretically, it is.
