Re: [RFC PATCH] bit_spinlock: introduce smp_cond_load_relaxed

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 02:47:29PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
> It is better to use smp_cond_load_relaxed instead
> of busy waiting for bit_spinlock.

Why?  I think we need some kind of "proof" that this is true before
being able to accept a patch like this, don't you agree?

thanks,

greg k-h