locking/Documentation: Fix incorrect example code

- Remove a stale line of code
 - Fix the condition of the READ_ONCE() example

Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sj38.park@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: akiyks@gmail.com
Cc: boqun.feng@gmail.com
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com
Cc: j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Cc: luc.maranget@inria.fr
Cc: npiggin@gmail.com
Cc: parri.andrea@gmail.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1526338533-6044-7-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
SeongJae Park 2018-05-14 15:55:32 -07:00 committed by Ingo Molnar
parent e89641dd03
commit fc7bdc9024
1 changed files with 1 additions and 2 deletions

View File

@ -111,7 +111,6 @@ If the compiler can prove that do_something() does not store to the
variable a, then the compiler is within its rights transforming this to variable a, then the compiler is within its rights transforming this to
the following:: the following::
tmp = a;
if (a > 0) if (a > 0)
for (;;) for (;;)
do_something(); do_something();
@ -119,7 +118,7 @@ the following::
If you don't want the compiler to do this (and you probably don't), then If you don't want the compiler to do this (and you probably don't), then
you should use something like the following:: you should use something like the following::
while (READ_ONCE(a) < 0) while (READ_ONCE(a) > 0)
do_something(); do_something();
Alternatively, you could place a barrier() call in the loop. Alternatively, you could place a barrier() call in the loop.