From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrea Parri Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] IB/hfi1: Fix improper uses of smp_mb__before_atomic() Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 23:12:21 +0200 Message-ID: <20190509211221.GA4966@andrea> References: <1556568902-12464-1-git-send-email-andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com> <1556568902-12464-6-git-send-email-andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com> <14063C7AD467DE4B82DEDB5C278E8663BE6AADCE@FMSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com> <20190429231657.GA2733@andrea> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190429231657.GA2733@andrea> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Ruhl, Michael J" Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "Dalessandro, Dennis" , "Marciniszyn, Mike" , Doug Ledford , Jason Gunthorpe , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , "Paul E. McKenney" , Peter Zijlstra List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 01:16:57AM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote: > Hi Mike, > > > >This barrier only applies to the read-modify-write operations; in > > >particular, it does not apply to the atomic_read() primitive. > > > > > >Replace the barrier with an smp_mb(). > > > > This is one of a couple of barrier issues that we are currently looking into. > > > > See: > > > > [PATCH for-next 6/9] IB/rdmavt: Add new completion inline > > > > We will take a look at this one as well. > > Thank you for the reference and for looking into this, So, I'm planning to just drop this patch; or can I do something to help? Please let me know. Thanx, Andrea > > Andrea