From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] MCS Lock: Allow architecture specific memory barrier in lock/unlock Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2013 08:40:38 +0100 Message-ID: <20131107074038.GB26654@gmail.com> References: <1383787620.11046.368.camel@schen9-DESK> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1383787620.11046.368.camel@schen9-DESK> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Tim Chen Cc: Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Waiman Long , Andrea Arcangeli , Alex Shi , Andi Kleen , Michel Lespinasse , Davidlohr Bueso , Matthew R Wilcox , Dave Hansen , Peter Zijlstra , Rik van Riel , Peter Hurley , "Paul E.McKenney" , Raghavendra K T , George Spelvin , "H. Peter Anvin" , Arnd Bergmann , Aswin List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org * Tim Chen wrote: > This patch moves the decision of what kind of memory barriers to be > used in the MCS lock and unlock functions to the architecture specific > layer. It also moves the actual lock/unlock code to mcs_spinlock.c > file. > > A full memory barrier will be used if the following macros are not > defined: > 1) smp_mb__before_critical_section() > 2) smp_mb__after_critical_section() > > For the x86 architecture, only compiler barrier will be needed. > > Acked-by: Tim Chen This should be Signed-off-by and should come last in the SOB chain, as you are the person passing the patch along. > Signed-off-by: Waiman Long I think you lost a: From: Waiman Long from the beginning of the mail, because right now if your patch is applied it will credit you with being the author - that wasn't the intention, right? Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org