Re: [PATCH] lglock: make lg_lock_global() actually lock globally

[Linus Torvalds]

On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> lglock: make lg_lock_global() actually lock globally

Grrr. Same disease as Nick and others. Why do you repeat the subject
line in the body? Don't do that. We don't want the summary line twice
in the commit message, and we don't want it twice in the email.

We simply don't want it twice. Full stop.

> lg_lock_global() currently only acquires spinlocks for online CPUs, but
> it's meant to lock all possible CPUs.  At Nick's suggestion, change
> for_each_online_cpu() to for_each_possible_cpu() to get the expected
> behavior.

Can you say what this actually matters for? Don't we do stop-machine
for CPU hotplug anyway? And if we don't, shouldn't we? Exactly because
otherwise "for_each_online_cpu()" is always racy (and that has nothing
to do with the lglock).

                  Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/