J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 04:14:10AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 02:28:10AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> >> Tatsukawa Kosuke wrote:
>> >> > J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> >> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:44:20AM +,
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 04:14:10AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 02:28:10AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> >> Tatsukawa Kosuke wrote:
> >> > J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:44:20AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> >>
J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 02:28:10AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> Tatsukawa Kosuke wrote:
>> > J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:44:20AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> >>> Tatsukawa Kosuke wrote:
>> >>> > J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> >>> >> Thanks f
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 02:28:10AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> Tatsukawa Kosuke wrote:
> > J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:44:20AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> >>> Tatsukawa Kosuke wrote:
> >>> > J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >>> >> Thanks for the detailed investigation.
Tatsukawa Kosuke wrote:
> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:44:20AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>>> Tatsukawa Kosuke wrote:
>>> > J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>>> >> Thanks for the detailed investigation.
>>> >>
>>> >> I think it would be worth adding a comment if that might help s
J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:44:20AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> Tatsukawa Kosuke wrote:
>> > J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> >> Thanks for the detailed investigation.
>> >>
>> >> I think it would be worth adding a comment if that might help someone
>> >> having to reinvesti
"J. Bruce Fields" writes:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:44:20AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> Tatsukawa Kosuke wrote:
>> > J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> >> Thanks for the detailed investigation.
>> >>
>> >> I think it would be worth adding a comment if that might help someone
>> >> having to rein
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:44:20AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> Tatsukawa Kosuke wrote:
> > J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >> Thanks for the detailed investigation.
> >>
> >> I think it would be worth adding a comment if that might help someone
> >> having to reinvestigate this again some day.
> >
Tatsukawa Kosuke wrote:
> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 03:57:13AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>>> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>>> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:41:06AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>>> >> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>>> >> > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 06:29:44AM +, K
J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 03:57:13AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:41:06AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> >> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> >> > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 06:29:44AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> >> >>
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 03:57:13AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:41:06AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> >> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 06:29:44AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> >> >> Neil Brown wrote:
> >> >> > K
J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:41:06AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 06:29:44AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> >> Neil Brown wrote:
>> >> > Kosuke Tatsukawa writes:
>> >> >
>> >> >> There are several places in net/sun
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:41:06AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 06:29:44AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> >> Neil Brown wrote:
> >> > Kosuke Tatsukawa writes:
> >> >
> >> >> There are several places in net/sunrpc/svcsock.c which calls
> >>
J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 06:29:44AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> Neil Brown wrote:
>> > Kosuke Tatsukawa writes:
>> >
>> >> There are several places in net/sunrpc/svcsock.c which calls
>> >> waitqueue_active() without calling a memory barrier. Add a memory
>> >> barr
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:18 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 06:29:44AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> > Neil Brown wrote:
> > > Kosuke Tatsukawa writes:
> > >
> > >> There are several places in net/sunrpc/svcsock.c which calls
> > >> waitqueue_active() without calling a m
On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 06:29:44AM +, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> Neil Brown wrote:
> > Kosuke Tatsukawa writes:
> >
> >> There are several places in net/sunrpc/svcsock.c which calls
> >> waitqueue_active() without calling a memory barrier. Add a memory
> >> barrier just as in wq_has_sleeper()
Neil Brown wrote:
> Kosuke Tatsukawa writes:
>
>> There are several places in net/sunrpc/svcsock.c which calls
>> waitqueue_active() without calling a memory barrier. Add a memory
>> barrier just as in wq_has_sleeper().
>>
>> I found this issue when I was looking through the linux source code
>>
Kosuke Tatsukawa writes:
> There are several places in net/sunrpc/svcsock.c which calls
> waitqueue_active() without calling a memory barrier. Add a memory
> barrier just as in wq_has_sleeper().
>
> I found this issue when I was looking through the linux source code
> for places calling waitqueu
18 matches
Mail list logo