On 16.1.2016 5:09, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (01/15/16 16:49), Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> [..]
>>
>> Could you please also help making the changelog more clear?
>>
>>>
>>>> + free_obj |= BIT(HANDLE_PIN_BIT);
>>>> record_obj(handle, free_obj);
>>
>> I think record_obj() should use WRITE_ONCE() or something like that.
>> Otherwise the compiler is IMHO allowed to reorder this, i.e. first to assign
>> free_obj to handle, and then add the PIN bit there.
>
> good note.
>
> ... or do both things in record_obj() (per Minchan)
>
> record_obj(handle, obj)
> {
> *(unsigned long)handle = obj & ~(1<<HANDLE_PIN_BIT);
Hmm but that's an unpin, not a pin? A mistake or I'm missing something?
Anyway the compiler can do the same thing here without a WRITE_ONCE().
> }
>
> -ss
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>