All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@hofr.at>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
	paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	waiman.long@hp.com, peterz@infradead.org,
	raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: BUG: spinlock bad magic on CPU#0, migration/0/9
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 20:39:05 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150212193905.GB28499@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150212193210.GA7244@opentech.at>

On 02/12, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
>
> On Thu, 12 Feb 2015, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > --- x/kernel/sched/completion.c
> > +++ x/kernel/sched/completion.c
> > @@ -274,7 +274,7 @@ bool try_wait_for_completion(struct comp
> >  	 * first without taking the lock so we can
> >  	 * return early in the blocking case.
> >  	 */
> > -	if (!ACCESS_ONCE(x->done))
> > +	if (!READ_ONCE(x->done))
> >  		return 0;
> >
> from looking at compiler.h I don't think that there would be a difference
> between ACCESS_ONCE() and READ_ONCE() in this case

Yes, this is unrelated "while at it" cosmetic change, now that we have
READ_ONCE() it makes more sense in this case.

Oleg.


  reply	other threads:[~2015-02-12 19:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-02-12  0:34 BUG: spinlock bad magic on CPU#0, migration/0/9 Paul E. McKenney
2015-02-12  3:15 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-02-12  3:43   ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-02-12 17:28   ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-12 17:41     ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-12 17:58       ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-02-12 19:10       ` Nicholas Mc Guire
2015-02-12 19:37         ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-12 21:27           ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-13 18:17             ` Nicholas Mc Guire
2015-02-13 18:53               ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-14  8:35                 ` Nicholas Mc Guire
2015-02-14 14:00                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-12 19:59         ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-02-12 19:32       ` Nicholas Mc Guire
2015-02-12 19:39         ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2015-02-12 19:59 ` [PATCH] sched/completion: completion_done() should serialize with complete() Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-13 21:09   ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-02-13 21:56   ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-02-13 22:02     ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-02-16  8:21   ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-16 16:51     ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-18 17:06   ` [tip:sched/core] sched/completion: Serialize completion_done() " tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov

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=20150212193905.GB28499@redhat.com \
    --to=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=der.herr@hofr.at \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=waiman.long@hp.com \
    /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.