[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110121092649.GA2832@htj.dyndns.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 10:26:49 +0100
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [cpuops cmpxchg double V2 1/4] Generic support for
this_cpu_cmpxchg_double
Hello,
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 09:31:02AM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On 1/8/11 7:24 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >Call me weird but I like this one than others. It sure is ugly but
> >the operation itself isn't a particularly pretty so it kinda matches.
> >Also, this one is the least error prone and more consistent with other
> >cpu ops.
>
> So what are we going to do about this patch? I'd love to merge
> Christoph's SLUB patches for linux-next now that .38-rc1 is out.
At least you like it, which is good.
I don't think the currently proposed one with two separate parameters
is significantly better than other alternatives and vice-versa. They
all have slightly different ugliness and error proneness issues.
That said, I still like the double parameter one best, and, unless
there are distinctively good reasons to choose another one, I'm gonna
commit it to percpu tree in a few days so that merge can proceed. So,
if you have something to say, now would be a good time to assert it.
Thank you.
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists