On 10/30/24 1:37 PM, Keith Busch wrote:

But if by "not atomic", if you're just saying we need a barrier on the
bitmap_copy, like smp_mb__after_atomic(), then yeah, I see that's
probably appropriate here.

smp_mb__after_atomic() follows atomic operations. bitmap_copy() does not
use any kind of atomic operation.

I'm wondering whether introducing a variant of bitmap_copy() that uses
WRITE_ONCE() or smp_store_release() would be appropriate.

Thanks,

Bart.