[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <28576.1165434195@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2006 19:43:15 +0000
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] WorkStruct: Implement generic UP cmpxchg() where an arch doesn't support it
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx> wrote:
> > Ok. For SMP-safety, it's important that any architecture that can't do
> > this needs to _share_ the same spinlock (on SMP only, of course) that it
> > uses for the bitops.
>
> That doesn't help, since assignment can't be guarded by any lock.
It's not a problem for workqueues, since the only direct assignment to the
management member variable is during initialisation.
But in general cmpxchg() might be a problem with respect to assignment.
atomic_cmpxchg() should be safe wrt atomic_set().
David
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists