[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160602155751.GB23133@insomnia>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 23:57:51 +0800
From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
manfred@...orfullife.com, dave@...olabs.net,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, will.deacon@....com,
Waiman.Long@....com, tj@...nel.org, pablo@...filter.org,
kaber@...sh.net, davem@...emloft.net, oleg@...hat.com,
netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, sasha.levin@...cle.com,
hofrat@...dl.org, jejb@...isc-linux.org, chris@...kel.net,
rth@...ddle.net, dhowells@...hat.com, schwidefsky@...ibm.com,
mpe@...erman.id.au, ralf@...ux-mips.org, linux@...linux.org.uk,
rkuo@...eaurora.org, vgupta@...opsys.com, james.hogan@...tec.com,
realmz6@...il.com, ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp, tony.luck@...el.com,
cmetcalf@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v4 5/7] locking, arch: Update spin_unlock_wait()
On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 11:11:07PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
[snip]
>
> OK, I will resend a new patch making spin_unlock_wait() align the
> semantics in your series.
>
I realize that if my patch goes first then it's more safe and convenient
to keep the two smp_mb()s in ppc arch_spin_unlock_wait(). I will only do
fix and clean up in my patch and leave the semantics changing part to
you ;-)
> Regards,
> Boqun
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists