[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VdbZu008RcxNhMysoqBs2FSPXWv+au_ROJ7FPVd0uOhtg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 18:04:57 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
"Steven Rostedt (VMware)" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] locking/qspinlock: Break qspinlock_types.h header loop
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 4:35 PM Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 7/29/20 8:28 AM, Herbert Xu wrote:
...
> This patch series looks good to me. I just wonder if we should also move
> ATOMIC64_INIT() to types.h for symmetry purpose. Anyway,
Same question here.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists