David Miller [mailto:davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 7:41 AM > To: oneukum@xxxxxxx > Cc: Hayeswang; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] net/usb/r8152: support aggregation > [...] > > I don't understand what problem the function is supposed to > fix. As long > > as I don't understand it I cannot say for sure whether it > is correct. > > There seems no obvious reason for a memory barrier, but > there may be a > > hidden reason I don't see. > > Hayes, when Oliver asks you "Against what is the memory > barrier?" he is asking > you which memory operations you are trying to order. > > You do not explain this in your commit message, nor do you > explain it with a > suitable comment. This is not acceptable. > > It is absolutely critical, that any time you add a memory > barrier, you add a > comment above the new memory barrier explaining exactly what > the barrier is > trying to achieve. > > In fact, this is required by our coding standards. I just want to make sure the rx_desc and rx_data are set correctly before they are used. However, I study some examples and information from internet, and I think that the memory barries is not necessary here. Therefore, I would remove them later. Best Regards, Hayes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
