[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48ED9BFB.4060904@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2008 01:51:55 -0400
From: Chris Snook <csnook@...hat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>,
Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] documentation: explain memory barriers
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 21:17:58 -0400 Chris Snook <csnook@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>> Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>> On Wed, 1 Oct 2008 22:54:04 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote:
>>>
>>>> This sequence is repeated three or four times and should be pulled out
>>>> into a well-commented function. That comment should explain the logic
>>>> behind the use of these barriers, please.
>>> and on 2008-OCT-08 Ben Hutchings wrote:
>>>
>>>> All memory barriers need a comment to explain why and what they're doing.
>
> I approve this message.
>
>> Seriously? When a barrier is used, it's generally self-evident what
>> it's doing.
>
> fs/buffer.c:sync_buffer(). Have fun.
The real disaster there is the clear_buffer_##name macro and friends, as
evidenced by fs/ext2/inode.c:599
clear_buffer_new(bh_result); /* What's this do? */
I'm completely in favor of documenting everything that can potentially interact
with that train wreck, but I maintain that the vast majority of memory barriers
are self-evident.
-- Chris
--
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