On 01/09/2016 16:40, Pranith Kumar wrote:
>> >
>> > bh is shared since it is equal to ctx->first_bh or
>> > ctx->first_bh->...->next. While the compiler will always order the load
>> > of bh->next after the load of ctx->first_bh and any previous load of
>> > bh->next, this may not be the case fo
On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 7:01 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 01/09/2016 00:29, Pranith Kumar wrote:
>> smp_read_barrier_depends() should be used only if you are reading
>> dependent pointers which are shared.
>
> bh is shared since it is equal to ctx->first_bh or
> ctx->first_bh->...->next. Whil
On 01/09/2016 00:29, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> smp_read_barrier_depends() should be used only if you are reading
> dependent pointers which are shared.
bh is shared since it is equal to ctx->first_bh or
ctx->first_bh->...->next. While the compiler will always order the load
of bh->next after the l
smp_read_barrier_depends() should be used only if you are reading
dependent pointers which are shared. Here 'bh' is a local variable and
dereferencing it will always be ordered after loading 'bh', i.e.,
bh->next will always be ordered after fetching bh.
This patch removes the barrier and adds a co
