[+ Will]
I'm not sure how this happened; Will, you at least figure as Reported-by: ;-)
Andrea
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 05:00:58AM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote:
> Commits 79d442461df74 ("locking/xchg/alpha: Clean up barrier usage by using
> smp_mb() in place of __ASM__MB") a
hg() and cmpxchg() memory
ordering bugs")
Reported-by: Will Deacon <will.dea...@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri <parri.and...@gmail.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Alan Stern <st...@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: Andrew Morton <a...@linux
Replace each occurrence of __ASM__MB with a (trailing) smp_mb() in
xchg(), cmpxchg(), and remove the now unused __ASM__MB definitions;
this improves readability, with no additional synchronization cost.
Suggested-by: Will Deacon <will.dea...@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri <
.
Cheers,
Andrea
Andrea Parri (2):
locking/xchg/alpha: Use smp_mb() in place of __ASM__MB
locking/xchg/alpha: Add leading smp_mb() to xchg(), cmpxchg()
arch/alpha/include/asm/cmpxchg.h | 6 --
arch/alpha/include/asm/xchg.h| 37 ++---
2 files changed, 26
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 11:21:38AM +, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Andrea,
>
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 07:45:56PM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote:
> > Continuing along with the fight against smp_read_barrier_depends() [1]
> > (or rather, against its improper use), add an
Hi Will,
none of my comments below represent objections to this patch, but
let me remark:
On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 05:31:54PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 12:11:10PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 05:33:49PM +0100, Will Deacon
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 01:24:36PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 04:06:21PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 Feb 2017, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 08:14:23PM +0100, Tobias Klausmann wrote:
> > > > Hi!
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 13 Feb
