Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S936189Ab3DHOFw (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:05:52 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:48363 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934619Ab3DHOFu (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:05:50 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] [PATCH] Gaurantee spinlocks implicit barrier for !PREEMPT_COUNT From: Steven Rostedt To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Vineet Gupta , Thomas Gleixner , Christian Ruppert , Pierrick Hascoet , Frederic Weisbecker , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: References: <1364998282-21437-1-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com> <20130404152808.GB15261@ab42.lan> <515E54BD.2090300@synopsys.com> <51602459.3040105@synopsys.com> <51624591.4010303@synopsys.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Organization: Red Hat Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 10:05:22 -0400 Message-ID: <1365429922.2733.4.camel@fedora> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 692 Lines: 21 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 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/