[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54665F8F.9010207@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 14:01:19 -0600
From: Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
CC: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, bobby.prani@...il.com, pmladek@...e.cz,
jack@...e.cz, mcgrof@...e.com, joe@...ches.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: drop logbuf_cpu volatile qualifier
On 11/14/2014 01:55 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 13:46:44 -0600
> Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org> wrote:
>
>> On 11/14/2014 01:45 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>>> On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 13:19:31 -0600
>>> Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Pranith Kumar posted a patch in which removed the "volatile"
>>>> qualifier for the "logbuf_cpu" variable in vprintk_emit().
>>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/13/894
>>>> In his patch, he used ACCESS_ONCE() for all references to
>>>> that symbol to provide whatever protection was intended.
>>>>
>>>> There was some discussion that followed, and in the end
>>>> Stephen Rostedt concluded that not only was "volatile" not
>>>
>>> I don't know of a Stephen Rostedt. J
>>
>> Sorry. I'm sure that's a source of annoyance. -Alex
>
> No problem. If you are wondering about that "J".
Yes, as a matter of fact, I did wonder.
> https://www.facebook.com/mcgrof/posts/10104459749108919
>
> It's my new thing. Maybe I can start a trend. J
I'm not big on smileys. L
But I'll remain neutral in this case. K
-Alex
> -- Steve
>
>>
>>>> needed, neither was it required to use ACCESS_ONCE(). I
>>>> offered an elaborate description that concluded Stephen
>>>
>>> Who is this Stephen you talk about?
>>
>> . . .
>
--
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