lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Apr]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] [PATCH] Gaurantee spinlocks implicit barrier for !PREEMPT_COUNT
From
Date
On Sun, 2013-04-07 at 21:48 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> Ingo? Peter? I'm not sure anybody really uses UP+no-preempt on x86,
> but it does seem to be a bug.. Comments?

I believe a lot of people still use no-preempt. Well, at least voluntary
preemption, which would have the same bug.

I'm thinking that we may have just been lucky that gcc didn't move the
get_user() into a place that would cause issues.

Sounds like a bug to me.

-- Steve




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-04-08 16:43    [W:0.054 / U:0.292 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site