From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754714AbbLIXPQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Dec 2015 18:15:16 -0500 Received: from e33.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.151]:36039 "EHLO e33.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754455AbbLIXPL (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Dec 2015 18:15:11 -0500 X-IBM-Helo: d03dlp02.boulder.ibm.com X-IBM-MailFrom: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com X-IBM-RcptTo: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: mingo@kernel.org, jiangshanlai@gmail.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, dvhart@linux.intel.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com, bobby.prani@gmail.com, Chris Metcalf , "Paul E. McKenney" Subject: [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 8/8] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: Fix ACCESS_ONCE thinko Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 15:15:02 -0800 Message-Id: <1449702902-2520-8-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.5.2 In-Reply-To: <20151209231426.GA2241@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20151209231426.GA2241@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 15120923-0009-0000-0000-0000106E378C Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Chris Metcalf In commit 2ecf810121c7 ("Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: Add needed ACCESS_ONCE() calls to memory-barriers.txt") the statement "Q = P" was converted to "ACCESS_ONCE(Q) = P". This should have been "Q = ACCESS_ONCE(P)". It later became "WRITE_ONCE(Q, P)". This doesn't match the following text, which is "Q = LOAD P". Change the statement to be "Q = READ_ONCE(P)". Signed-off-by: Chris Metcalf Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney --- Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt index aef9487303d0..85304ebd187c 100644 --- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt +++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt @@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ There are some minimal guarantees that may be expected of a CPU: (*) On any given CPU, dependent memory accesses will be issued in order, with respect to itself. This means that for: - WRITE_ONCE(Q, P); smp_read_barrier_depends(); D = READ_ONCE(*Q); + Q = READ_ONCE(P); smp_read_barrier_depends(); D = READ_ONCE(*Q); the CPU will issue the following memory operations: @@ -202,9 +202,9 @@ There are some minimal guarantees that may be expected of a CPU: and always in that order. On most systems, smp_read_barrier_depends() does nothing, but it is required for DEC Alpha. The READ_ONCE() - and WRITE_ONCE() are required to prevent compiler mischief. Please - note that you should normally use something like rcu_dereference() - instead of open-coding smp_read_barrier_depends(). + is required to prevent compiler mischief. Please note that you + should normally use something like rcu_dereference() instead of + open-coding smp_read_barrier_depends(). (*) Overlapping loads and stores within a particular CPU will appear to be ordered within that CPU. This means that for: -- 2.5.2