Excerpts from Peter Zijlstra's message of July 2, 2020 6:28 pm: > On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 05:48:33PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: >> There is no need for rmb(), this allows faster lwsync here. > > Since you determined this; I'm thinking you actually understand the > ordering here. How about recording this understanding in a comment? > > Also, should the lock->slock load not use READ_ONCE() ? Yeah, good point. Maybe I'll drop it from this series, doesn't really belong I just saw the cleanup and didn't want to forget it. We we just ordering the two loads in this function, and !SMP isn't a concern (i.e., no issues of !SMP guest on SMP HV), but yeah fixing the lack of comment is warranted, thanks. Thanks, Nick
