On 6/12/23 03:27, Huang, Kai wrote: > So I think a __mb() after setting tdmr->pamt_4k_base should be good enough, as > it guarantees when setting to any pamt_*_size happens, the valid pamt_4k_base > will be seen by other cpus. > > Does it make sense? Just use a normal old atomic_t or set_bit()/test_bit(). They have built-in memory barriers are are less likely to get botched.
