Re: [PATCH -next v2 0/5] ipc/sem: semop(2) improvements

2016-09-20 Thread Davidlohr Bueso
On Mon, 19 Sep 2016, Manfred Spraul wrote: On 09/18/2016 09:11 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: Davidlohr Bueso (5): ipc/sem: do not call wake_sem_queue_do() prematurely The only patch that I don't like. Especially: patch 2 of the series removes the wake_up_q from the function epilogue. So only

Re: [PATCH -next v2 0/5] ipc/sem: semop(2) improvements

2016-09-19 Thread Manfred Spraul
On 09/18/2016 09:11 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: Changes from v1 (https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/9/12/266) - Got rid of the signal_pending check in wakeup fastpath. (patch 2) - Added read/access once to queue.status (we're obviously concerned about lockless access upon unrelated events, even if on th

[PATCH -next v2 0/5] ipc/sem: semop(2) improvements

2016-09-18 Thread Davidlohr Bueso
Changes from v1 (https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/9/12/266) - Got rid of the signal_pending check in wakeup fastpath. (patch 2) - Added read/access once to queue.status (we're obviously concerned about lockless access upon unrelated events, even if on the stack). - Got rid of initializing wake_q and wak