On 6 September 2026 14:09:53 BST, Mathieu Desnoyers <[email protected]> wrote: >On 2026-09-05 16:40, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 04, 2026 at 06:28:45PM +0100, Bradley Morgan wrote: >[...] >> I would not say "no" to a fix for this issue: >> >> >https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ > >I'm not sure this URL actually points to a relevant issue ? >
No, that URL is my signature, just in case people 1: add my old email to R-Bs, or SOBs. 2: makes people aware this is me. >> >> Once that is in place, I would be happy to put this back into -next. >> >> At some point, we will need to get rid of the concept of wildcard hazard >> pointers, as those end up instead emulating RCU, but I don't see that >> as an immediate obstacle. > >I already have the implementation which eliminates the wildcard if we >care about this. It was part of a previous hazptr series version. > >Do you want me to resurrect it on top of the current series ? >This depends on: > >- ptr_eq(), >- then use ptr_eq() to compare the loaded pointer (pre mb) > with the re-loaded pointer (post-mb). > >See: >https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ > >Thanks, > >Mathieu > > --- Thanks! https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
