[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] More thread sanitizer fixes and atomic.h im
|
From: |
Emilio G. Cota |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] More thread sanitizer fixes and atomic.h improvements |
|
Date: |
Wed, 12 Oct 2016 18:45:10 -0400 |
|
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) |
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 15:59:02 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> See each patch. My attempt at fixing whatever I did when I obviously
> didn't know enough^W about the C11 memory model, and at setting a
> better example for future generations...
Just for context. Building on this patchset, is it now time to
phase out smp_(rw)mb in favour or C11's acq/rel, as you laid
out in your KVM Forum talk [*]?
What is the plan with smp_mb_(sg)et? It's not clear to me from
the slides, but given patch 5 I don't see a reason to keep them.
Thanks,
Emilio
[*]
http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/kvmforum16-atomic2.pdf
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/5] atomic: introduce smp_mb_acquire and smp_mb_release, (continued)
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] rcu: simplify memory barriers, Paolo Bonzini, 2016/10/10
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/5] atomic: base mb_read/mb_set on load-acquire and store-release, Paolo Bonzini, 2016/10/10
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] More thread sanitizer fixes and atomic.h improvements, no-reply, 2016/10/10
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] More thread sanitizer fixes and atomic.h improvements, no-reply, 2016/10/11
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] More thread sanitizer fixes and atomic.h improvements, Alex Bennée, 2016/10/12
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] More thread sanitizer fixes and atomic.h improvements,
Emilio G. Cota <=
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] More thread sanitizer fixes and atomic.h improvements, Alex Bennée, 2016/10/21