[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1471543480.4991.18.camel@j-VirtualBox>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:04:40 -0700
From: Jason Low <jason.low2@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: jason.low2@....com, Waiman Long <waiman.long@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Imre Deak <imre.deak@...el.com>, jason.low2@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] locking/mutex: Ensure forward progress of
waiter-spinner
On Thu, 2016-08-18 at 17:58 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 11:01:27AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> > The following is the updated patch that should fix the build error in
> > non-x86 platform.
> >
>
> This patch was whitespace challenged, but I think I munged it properly.
>
> I've also stuck something based on Jason's patch on top. Please have a
> look at:
>
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/peterz/queue.git/log/?h=locking/core
Should we convert the flags back to type 'bool'? We're using them as
booleans and we could also leave unneeded space available in case we
ever need to squeeze some more variable(s) in the structure.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists