From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] time: Add locking to xtime access in get_seconds()
Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 08:50:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1304578231.32152.781.camel@edumazet-laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1304576495.2943.40.camel@work-vm>
Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 23:21 -0700, john stultz a écrit :
> Would a comment to the effect of "ensure processors don't re-order calls
> to get_seconds" help, or is it still too opaque (or even still
> nonsense?).
>
Where is corresponding smp_wmb() ? It's not obvious, so you must add a
comment to help reader of this code.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-05 6:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-04 3:11 [PATCH] time: Add locking to xtime access in get_seconds() John Stultz
2011-05-04 3:52 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-05 2:54 ` john stultz
2011-05-05 5:44 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-05 6:21 ` john stultz
2011-05-05 6:50 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2011-05-05 8:14 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-05-05 18:51 ` john stultz
2011-05-05 14:04 ` [RFC] time: xtime_lock is held too long Eric Dumazet
2011-05-05 14:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-05 15:08 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-05 15:59 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-05 21:01 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-06 1:41 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-06 6:55 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-06 10:18 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-06 10:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-06 16:53 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-07 8:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-06 16:59 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-06 17:09 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-06 17:17 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-06 17:42 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-06 17:50 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-06 19:26 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-06 20:04 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-06 20:24 ` john stultz
2011-05-06 22:30 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-06 22:46 ` john stultz
2011-05-06 23:00 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-06 23:28 ` john stultz
2011-05-07 5:02 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-07 7:11 ` Henrik Rydberg
2011-05-09 8:40 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-12 9:13 ` [PATCH] seqlock: don't smp_rmb in seqlock reader spin loop, [PATCH] seqlock: don't smp_rmb in seqlock reader spin loop Milton Miller
2011-05-12 9:13 ` Milton Miller
2011-05-12 9:35 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-12 9:35 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-12 14:08 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-12 14:08 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-06 20:18 ` [RFC] time: xtime_lock is held too long john stultz
2011-05-05 17:57 ` [PATCH] time: Add locking to xtime access in get_seconds() Andi Kleen
2011-05-05 20:17 ` john stultz
2011-05-05 20:24 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-05 20:40 ` john stultz
2011-05-05 20:43 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-05 20:56 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-04 16:51 ` Max Asbock
2011-05-04 21:05 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-04 23:05 ` john stultz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1304578231.32152.781.camel@edumazet-laptop \
--to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.