[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 23:05:11 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>, LKP <lkp@...org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com>,
Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>,
Jade Alglave <j.alglave@....ac.uk>
Subject: Re: rcu_read_lock lost its compiler barrier
On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 12:51:09PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 10:44:18AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> >
> > Currently the LKMM says the test is allowed and there is a data race,
> > but this answer clearly is wrong since it would violate the RCU
> > guarantee.
>
> Thank you! This is what I tried to say all along in this thread
> but you expressed it in a much better way :)
In case you were wondering, the reason that I was giving you such
a hard time was that from what I could see, you were pushing for no
{READ,WRITE}_ONCE() at all. ;-)
Thanx, Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists