From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1760534AbcAKWWq (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 11 Jan 2016 17:22:46 -0500
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:45911 "EHLO
	bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751678AbcAKWWo (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 11 Jan 2016 17:22:44 -0500
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 23:22:35 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Andrew Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org" 
	<linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/mm: Add barriers and document switch_mm()
 -vs-flush synchronization
Message-ID: <20160111222235.GM6344@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <tip-71b3c126e61177eb693423f2e18a1914205b165e@git.kernel.org>
 <20160111182548.GF6344@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CALCETrXLUewtYNQOdiGpKLvp=RL0eMLSj+v7_J0G1a_do+6G8Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrXLUewtYNQOdiGpKLvp=RL0eMLSj+v7_J0G1a_do+6G8Q@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 01:50:24PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 03:42:40AM -0800, tip-bot for Andy Lutomirski wrote:

> >> +              * The bad outcome can occur if either CPU's load is
> >> +              * reordered before that CPU's store, so both CPUs much
> >
> > s/much/must/ ?
> 
> Indeed.  Is this worth a follow-up patch?

Dunno, I didn't even spot the typo the first time I read it.. :-)