On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 09:19:31AM -0700, mark gross wrote: > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 08:36:37PM +0000, Vineeth Remanan Pillai wrote: > > From: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> > > > > Make sure the entire for loop has stop_cpus_in_progress set. > It is not clear how this commit comment matches the change. Please explain > how adding 2 barrier's makes sure stop_cpus_in_progress is set for the entier > for loop.
Without the barrier the compiler is free to move the stores around. It probably doesn't do anything bad, but this makes sure it cannot.
