[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19422.1304540499@localhost>
Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 16:21:39 -0400
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
werner <w.landgraf@...ru>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [block IO crash] Re: 2.6.39-rc5-git2 boot crashs
On Wed, 04 May 2011 15:04:39 CDT, Christoph Lameter said:
> On Wed, 4 May 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > But cmpxchg DOES NOT MAKE SENSE without atomicity guarantees.
>
> This is not a real cmpxchg after all. Its not atomic in the sense of
> other functions. Its only "percpu atomic" if you want it that way. This is
> *not* a full cmpxchg_double().
Calling it a cmpxchg when it doesn't have the primary distinguishing property
of a hardware cmpxchg is just loading a bullet in the chamber and inviting
kernel hackers to point it at their feet...
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists