[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180514230105.GA6421@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 16:01:05 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
mingo@...nel.org
Cc: stern@...land.harvard.edu, parri.andrea@...il.com,
will.deacon@....com, peterz@...radead.org, boqun.feng@...il.com,
npiggin@...il.com, dhowells@...hat.com, j.alglave@....ac.uk,
luc.maranget@...ia.fr, akiyks@...il.com
Subject: [PATCH memory-model 0/3] Kernel fixes to spin_is_locked()
Hello!
This series contains fixes to the kernel related to the semantics
of spin_is_locked(), all courtesy of Andrea Parri, and all ready for
inclusion in -tip:
1. Document the semantics of spin_is_locked() by adding a docbook
header comment.
2. Remove smp_mb() from arch_spin_is_locked(), given that the
new order-free spin_is_locked() semantics require no such barrier.
3. Clean up comment and #ifndef for {,queued_}spin_is_locked().
The comment was "XXX think about spin_is_locked", and I can
attest that we have now done some serious thinking. ;-)
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Powered by blists - more mailing lists