From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754039AbbCXQ6k (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2015 12:58:40 -0400 Received: from g4t3425.houston.hp.com ([15.201.208.53]:48657 "EHLO g4t3425.houston.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752558AbbCXQ6i (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2015 12:58:38 -0400 Message-ID: <1427216312.2515.46.camel@j-VirtualBox> Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Remove usages of ACCESS_ONCE From: Jason Low To: Christian Borntraeger Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , Christoph Lameter , Linus Torvalds , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim , Andrew Morton , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Aswin Chandramouleeswaran , Mel Gorman , Hugh Dickins , Minchan Kim , Davidlohr Bueso , Rik van Riel , jason.low2@hp.com Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 09:58:32 -0700 In-Reply-To: <551177F0.3070006@de.ibm.com> References: <1427150680.2515.36.camel@j-VirtualBox> <551177F0.3070006@de.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2015-03-24 at 15:42 +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > Am 23.03.2015 um 23:44 schrieb Jason Low: > > Commit 38c5ce936a08 converted ACCESS_ONCE usage in gup_pmd_range() to > > READ_ONCE, since ACCESS_ONCE doesn't work reliably on non-scalar types. > > > > This patch removes the rest of the usages of ACCESS_ONCE, and use > > READ_ONCE for the read accesses. This also makes things cleaner, > > instead of using separate/multiple sets of APIs. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Low > > Reviewed-by: Christian Borntraeger Thanks. > one remark or question: > > > - anon_mapping = (unsigned long) ACCESS_ONCE(page->mapping); > > + anon_mapping = (unsigned long)READ_ONCE(page->mapping); > > Were the white space changes intentional? IIRC checkpatch does prefer > it your way and you have changed several places - so I assume yes. Yeah, those changes were intentional. I thought that this was more of the standard style to do casting, so I made those changes as well. > Either way, its probably fine to change that along. Okay, I'll assume that this is fine for now unless something thinks this shouldn't be part of the patch.