Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 6 Aug 2020 14:48:42 +0200 | From | peterz@infradea ... | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] sched: membarrier: cover kthread_use_mm |
| |
On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 01:13:46PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > I'm not sure I really see the benefit of the rename, to be honest with you, > especially if smp_mb__after_spinlock() doesn't disappear at the same time.
The reason I proposed a rename is because:
mutex_lock(&foo); smp_mb__after_spinlock();
looks weird. But, afaict, it will work as expected. As the only possible way to implement any lock() is with atomic*_acquire() or stronger.
Another possible name would be: smp_mb__after_lock().
| |