[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4997357157f5735d07efdc7cd45388bd32375e5c.camel@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 22:37:29 +0000
From: Allison Henderson <allison.henderson@...cle.com>
To: "michal.kubiak@...el.com" <michal.kubiak@...el.com>,
"woni9911@...il.com"
<woni9911@...il.com>
CC: "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"rds-devel@....oracle.com"
<rds-devel@....oracle.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"edumazet@...gle.com"
<edumazet@...gle.com>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"threeearcat@...il.com" <threeearcat@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] rds: introduce acquire/release ordering in
acquire/release_in_xmit()
On Thu, 2024-03-14 at 12:51 +0100, Michal Kubiak wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 08:21:35PM +0900, Yewon Choi wrote:
> > acquire/release_in_xmit() work as bit lock in rds_send_xmit(), so
> > they
> > are expected to ensure acquire/release memory ordering semantics.
> > However, test_and_set_bit/clear_bit() don't imply such semantics,
> > on
> > top of this, following smp_mb__after_atomic() does not guarantee
> > release
> > ordering (memory barrier actually should be placed before
> > clear_bit()).
> >
> > Instead, we use clear_bit_unlock/test_and_set_bit_lock() here.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yewon Choi <woni9911@...il.com>
>
> Missing "Fixes" tag for the patch addressed to the "net" tree.
>
> Thanks,
> Michal
Yes, I think it needs:
Fixes: 1f9ecd7eacfd ("RDS: Pass rds_conn_path to rds_send_xmit()")
Since that is the last patch to modify the affected code. Other than
that I think the patch looks good. With the tag fixed, you can add my
rvb:
Reviewed-by: Allison Henderson <allison.henderson@...cle.com>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists