[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 10:05:25 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc: mst@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 7/9] vhost: do not use RCU to synchronize MMU notifier
with worker
On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 08:54:54PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> I don't have any objection to convertĀ to spinlock() but just want to
> know if any case that the above smp_mb() + counter looks good to you?
This email is horribly mangled, but I don't think mixing smb_mb() and
smp_load_acquire() would be considerd a best-practice, and using
smp_store_release() instead would be the wrong barrier.
spinlock does seem to be the only existing locking primitive that does
what is needed here.
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists