[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1320741980.2244.4.camel@twins>
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 09:46:20 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com>
Cc: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com,
bp@...en8.de, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
casteyde.christian@...e.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] lockdep: lock_set_subclass() fix
On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 16:14 +0800, Yong Zhang wrote:
>
> But how do we deal with ->class_cache? Always set it in
> loop_up_lock_class()?
Hrm.. good point, aside from that there's another problem as well, I
think we can deal with the cache being NULL, but is memset() an atomic
write? If not a read could observe an intermediate state and go funny.
I'm tempted to go with the pure kmemcheck_mark_initialized() thing for
now.
--
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