Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/11] util/qht: Document memory ordering assumptions

[Sergey Fedorov]

On 13/07/16 10:36, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> On 13/07/2016 01:19, Emilio G. Cota wrote:
>> I wouldn't put those comments in the source--seqlock callers should
>> know what they're doing, and what barriers seqlocks imply.
> In general I'd agree with you, however in this case the "begin" calls
> are what implements QHT's guarantee *for the caller*, so I think it's
> worth having the comments.  In other words, if for any reason you do
> anything before the read_begin and write_begin you still have to provide
> barrier semantics.  It's not an explanation, it's a protection against
> future mistakes.

Exactly :)

> There's no need for such comment at read_retry and write_end callsites,
> though.

Why?

> Also, it's spelled "guarantee". :)

Hmm, I can't see where the spelling isn't correct.

Thanks,
Sergey