[2.4] [PATCH] hash_page rework, take 2

Benjamin Herrenschmidt benh at kernel.crashing.org
Fri Feb 13 09:25:12 EST 2004

> I can't even find any other users of is_read_locked in the ppc64 code. I
> guess it should be fixed for future reference though. :-)
> As for the memory barrier: Since smb_mb() (sync) is "larger" than
> smb_rmb() (lwsync), we should be fine to keep it outside the loop:

Sure, the code is fine, I was correcting your comments :)

> I didn't look much at it yet, but there's no isync after the loop at the
> top of __hash_page (add one right before "Step 2"). I can supply patch,
> but it's pretty obvious where it should go...

I did already, it's in linus tree.


** Sent via the linuxppc64-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

More information about the Linuxppc64-dev mailing list