[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAG_fn=UAF2aYD1mFbakNhcYk5yZR6tFeP8R-Yyq0p_7hy9owXA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2023 18:14:56 +0200
From: Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>
To: andrey.konovalov@...ux.dev
Cc: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...il.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com,
Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@...gle.com>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/19] lib/stackdepot: fix and clean-up atomic annotations
On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 7:15 PM <andrey.konovalov@...ux.dev> wrote:
>
> From: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
>
> Simplify comments accompanying the use of atomic accesses in the
> stack depot code.
>
> Also drop smp_load_acquire from next_pool_required in depot_init_pool,
> as both depot_init_pool and the all smp_store_release's to this variable
> are executed under the stack depot lock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
Reviewed-by: Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>
(but see below)
> * Move on to the next pool.
> * WRITE_ONCE pairs with potential concurrent read in
> - * stack_depot_fetch().
> + * stack_depot_fetch.
Why are you removing the parentheses here? kernel-doc uses them to
tell functions from non-functions, and having them in non-doc comments
sounds consistent.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists