On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 12:19:48PM +0000, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 04:08:31PM -0800, Tim Chen wrote:
> > +#ifndef arch_mcs_spin_lock_contended
> > +/*
> > + * Using smp_load_acquire() provides a memory barrier that ensures
> > + * subsequent operations happen after the lock is acquired.
> > + */
> > +#define arch_mcs_spin_lock_contended(l) \
> > + while (!(smp_load_acquire(l))) { \
> > + arch_mutex_cpu_relax(); \
> > + }
> > +#endif
>
> I think that wants to be:
>
> #define arch_mcs_spin_lock_contended(l) \
> do { \
> while (!smp_load_acquire(l)) \
> arch_mutex_cpu_relax(); \
> } while (0)
>
> So that we properly eat the ';' in: arch_mcs_spin_lock_contended(l);.
Yeah, that's better.
Tim: are you happy making that change please?
Will
--
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>