[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+icZUVd3zp-pJDspBUsipH4725uUvaufXrK0QBzcrozF2m+aA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 08:18:39 +0200
From: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>
To: liguang <lig.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shli@...ionio.com,
srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, suresh.b.siddha@...el.com,
fweisbec@...il.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] smp: use '|=' for csd_lock
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 7:47 AM, liguang <lig.fnst@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> originally, 'data->flags = CSD_FLAG_LOCK',
> and we use 'data->flags &= ~CSD_FLAG_LOCK'
> for csd_unlock, they are not symmetrix operations
> so use '|=' instead of '='.
> though, now data->flags only hold CSD_FLAG_LOCK,
> it's not so meaningful to use '|=' to set 1 bit,
> and '&= ~' to clear 1 bit.
>
Hi,
what's the reason I got CCed on this two patches? The ipc-sem-next
issue I reported?
Against what tree are those patches?
They are not compatible with Linux-Next (next-20130419).
Thanks.
Regards,
- Sedat -
[1] http://marc.info/?t=136631457900005&r=1&w=2
> Signed-off-by: liguang <lig.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
> ---
> kernel/smp.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/smp.c b/kernel/smp.c
> index 1818dc0..2d5deb4 100644
> --- a/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ static void csd_lock_wait(struct call_single_data *data)
> static void csd_lock(struct call_single_data *data)
> {
> csd_lock_wait(data);
> - data->flags = CSD_FLAG_LOCK;
> + data->flags |= CSD_FLAG_LOCK;
>
> /*
> * prevent CPU from reordering the above assignment
> --
> 1.7.2.5
>
--
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