[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4BCC69D5.3050209@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 17:33:57 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@...hat.com>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Zachary Amsden <zamsden@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] Add a global synchronization point for pvclock
On 04/19/2010 05:21 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
>
>> Oh yes, just trying to avoid a patch with both atomic64_read() and
>> ACCESS_ONCE().
>>
> you're mixing the private version of the patch you saw with this one.
> there isn't any atomic reads in here. I'll use a barrier then
>
This patch writes last_value atomically, but reads it non-atomically. A
barrier is insufficient.
--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.
--
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