[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1456290047-16654-14-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 21:00:47 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, jiangshanlai@...il.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
dvhart@...ux.intel.com, fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com,
bobby.prani@...il.com, SeongJae Park <sj38.park@...il.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 14/14] documentation: Clarify compiler store-fusion example
From: SeongJae Park <sj38.park@...il.com>
The compiler store-fusion example in memory-barriers.txt uses a C
comment to represent arbitrary code that does not update a given
variable. Unfortunately, someone could reasonably interpret the
comment as instead referring to the following line of code. This
commit therefore replaces the comment with a string that more
clearly represents the arbitrary code.
Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sj38.park@...il.com>
Acked-by: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
index 8367d393cba2..3729cbe60e41 100644
--- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
+++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
@@ -1550,7 +1550,7 @@ of optimizations:
the following:
a = 0;
- /* Code that does not store to variable a. */
+ ... Code that does not store to variable a ...
a = 0;
The compiler sees that the value of variable 'a' is already zero, so
@@ -1562,7 +1562,7 @@ of optimizations:
wrong guess:
WRITE_ONCE(a, 0);
- /* Code that does not store to variable a. */
+ ... Code that does not store to variable a ...
WRITE_ONCE(a, 0);
(*) The compiler is within its rights to reorder memory accesses unless
--
2.5.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists