Re: [PATCHv5 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock

From: Jiri Olsa
Date: Fri Jul 03 2009 - 07:43:46 EST


On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 11:30:27AM +0000, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 01:18:48PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> ...
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h
> > index b7e5db8..4e77853 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h
> ...
> > @@ -1271,6 +1271,9 @@ static inline int sk_has_allocations(const struct sock *sk)
> > * in its cache, and so does the tp->rcv_nxt update on CPU2 side. The CPU1
> > * could then endup calling schedule and sleep forever if there are no more
> > * data on the socket.
> > + *
> > + * The sk_has_helper is always called right after a call to read_lock, so we
> Btw.:
> - * The sk_has_helper is always called right after a call to read_lock, so we
> + * The sk_has_sleeper is always called right after a call to read_lock, so we
>
> Jarek P.

oops, thanks
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/