[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0803071213370.6815@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 12:15:22 -0800 (PST)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...ranet.com>
cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Robin Holt <holt@....com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>, kvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
general@...ts.openfabrics.org,
Steve Wise <swise@...ngridcomputing.com>,
Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>,
Kanoj Sarcar <kanojsarcar@...oo.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
daniel.blueman@...drics.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 3/4 combine RCU with seqlock to allow mmu notifier
methods to sleep (#v9 was 1/4)
On Fri, 7 Mar 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> This is a replacement for the previously posted 3/4, one of the pieces
> to allow the mmu notifier methods to sleep.
Looks good. That is what we talked about last week. What guarantees now
that we see the cacheline referenced after the cacheline that
contains the pointer that was changed? hlist_for_reach does a
rcu_dereference with implied memory barrier? So its like EMM?
--
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