This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sourceware.org
mailing list for the systemtap project.
[Bug translator/6932] c->busy can be non-atomic.
- From: "fche at redhat dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org>
- To: systemtap at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: 3 Mar 2009 04:07:28 -0000
- Subject: [Bug translator/6932] c->busy can be non-atomic.
- References: <20081001203800.6932.mhiramat@redhat.com>
- Reply-to: sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org
------- Additional Comments From fche at redhat dot com 2009-03-03 04:07 -------
> I don't think that atomic operations will guarantee memory order either, so
> we're probably already missing barriers...
For the "busy" flag, I don't think ordering issues arise if we continue to
use the atomic.h API. Concurrent reads/writes are SMP-synchronized - that's
the whole point. Note that we only write c->fields if the atomic_inc_return
returned the proper value.
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6932
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.