On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 07:23:42PM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote:
> > commit 33a58ee5eadadfb1f4850eabd4fac332984881d5
> > Author: Paul E. McKenney
> > Date: Tue Jul 3 08:48:09 2018 -0700
> >
> > tools/memory-model: Add informal LKMM documentation to MAINTAINERS
> >
> > The Linux-kernel
> commit 33a58ee5eadadfb1f4850eabd4fac332984881d5
> Author: Paul E. McKenney
> Date: Tue Jul 3 08:48:09 2018 -0700
>
> tools/memory-model: Add informal LKMM documentation to MAINTAINERS
>
> The Linux-kernel memory model has been informal, with a number of
> text files documenti
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 12:12:41PM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote:
> > > 1) Merge the file touched by that patch into (the recently created):
> > >
> > > Documentation/atomic_t.txt
> > >
> > > (FWIW, queued in my TODO list).
> >
> > Some consolidation of documentation would be good.
> > 1) Merge the file touched by that patch into (the recently created):
> >
> > Documentation/atomic_t.txt
> >
> > (FWIW, queued in my TODO list).
>
> Some consolidation of documentation would be good. ;-)
>
> Thoughts from others?
>
> > 2) Add the entry:
> >
> > F: D
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 06:51:11PM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote:
> > 1bc179880fba docs: atomic_ops: Describe atomic_set as a write operation
> >
> > The above patches need at least one additional Acked-by
> > or Reviewed-by. If any of you gets a chance, please do
> > look them over.
>
>
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 07:22:22AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> On 2018/06/28 08:21:40 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> [...]
> >
> > While I am at it, here is the current scorecard:
> >
> > e9ff68680cd4 tools/memory-model: Add litmus test for full multicopy
> > atomicity
> > c21fcc6594f1 tool
On 2018/06/28 08:21:40 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
[...]
>
> While I am at it, here is the current scorecard:
>
> e9ff68680cd4 tools/memory-model: Add litmus test for full multicopy atomicity
> c21fcc6594f1 tools/memory-model: Fix ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce name
> aa838e0b70e1 MAINTAI
> 1bc179880fba docs: atomic_ops: Describe atomic_set as a write operation
>
> The above patches need at least one additional Acked-by
> or Reviewed-by. If any of you gets a chance, please do
> look them over.
Glad this came out. ;-)
No objection to the patch: feel free to add
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 02:38:45PM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 01:33:45PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > Since commit:
> >
> > b899a850431e2dd0 ("compiler.h: Remove ACCESS_ONCE()")
> >
> > ... there has been no definition of ACCESS_ONCE() in the kernel tree,
> >
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 01:33:45PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Since commit:
>
> b899a850431e2dd0 ("compiler.h: Remove ACCESS_ONCE()")
>
> ... there has been no definition of ACCESS_ONCE() in the kernel tree,
> and it has been necessary to use READ_ONCE() or WRITE_ONCE() instead.
>
>
Since commit:
b899a850431e2dd0 ("compiler.h: Remove ACCESS_ONCE()")
... there has been no definition of ACCESS_ONCE() in the kernel tree,
and it has been necessary to use READ_ONCE() or WRITE_ONCE() instead.
However, since then the kernel memory model was added to the Linux tree,
sport
11 matches
Mail list logo
