On 10/30/24 1:37 PM, Keith Busch wrote:
But if by "not atomic", if you're just saying we need a barrier on the bitmap_copy, like smp_mb__after_atomic(), then yeah, I see that's probably appropriate here.
smp_mb__after_atomic() follows atomic operations. bitmap_copy() does not use any kind of atomic operation. I'm wondering whether introducing a variant of bitmap_copy() that uses WRITE_ONCE() or smp_store_release() would be appropriate. Thanks, Bart.
