[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161017154938.GV3142@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 17:49:38 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Waiman Long <waiman.long@....com>,
Jason Low <jason.low2@....com>,
Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Imre Deak <imre.deak@...el.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Terry Rudd <terry.rudd@....com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ibm.com>,
Jason Low <jason.low2@...com>,
Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v4 6/8] locking/mutex: Restructure wait loop
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 09:45:01PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> But __mutex_set_flag() and __mutex_trylock() actually touch the same
> atomic word? So we don't need extra things to order them?
Right.. in any case brain is confused. I'll look again at it later.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists