On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 12:38:20 -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> This primitive has been renamed, but because it was spelled incorrectly in the
> first place it must have escaped the fixup patch. As far as I can tell this
> logic is still correct: smp_mb__after_spinlock() uses the default smp_mb()
>
On Thu, 2020-07-16 at 12:38 -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> From: Palmer Dabbelt
>
> This primitive has been renamed, but because it was spelled incorrectly in the
> first place it must have escaped the fixup patch. As far as I can tell this
> logic is still correct: smp_mb__after_spinlock()
From: Palmer Dabbelt
This primitive has been renamed, but because it was spelled incorrectly in the
first place it must have escaped the fixup patch. As far as I can tell this
logic is still correct: smp_mb__after_spinlock() uses the default smp_mb()
implementation, which is "sync" rather than
