On 11/27/18 4:20 PM, Li, Sun peng (Leo) wrote:
>
>
> On 2018-11-22 12:34 p.m., Nicholas Kazlauskas wrote:
>> [Why]
>> Two non-blocking commits in succession can result in a sequence where
>> the same dc->current_state is queried for both commits.
>>
>> 1. 1st commit -> check -> commit -> swaps at
On 2018-11-22 12:34 p.m., Nicholas Kazlauskas wrote:
> [Why]
> Two non-blocking commits in succession can result in a sequence where
> the same dc->current_state is queried for both commits.
>
> 1. 1st commit -> check -> commit -> swaps atomic state -> queues work
> 2. 2nd commit -> check -> com
[Why]
Two non-blocking commits in succession can result in a sequence where
the same dc->current_state is queried for both commits.
1. 1st commit -> check -> commit -> swaps atomic state -> queues work
2. 2nd commit -> check -> commit -> swaps atomic state -> queues work
3. 1st commit work finishe
