[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wi+vA+V_vYjC7gcy2mEJhwp6VB8u_RCizAF4rmH0TZb2A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 16:18:35 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
Cc: Brian Cain <bcain@...cinc.com>, linux-hexagon@...r.kernel.org,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Jade Alglave <j.alglave@....ac.uk>,
Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>,
Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] provide arch_test_bit_acquire for architectures that
define test_bit
On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 4:10 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> Looks good to me, except I'd just do
>
> #define arch_test_bit_acquire arch_test_bit
>
> on hexagon rather than duplicate that function.
Oh, except you didn't quite duplicate it, you added the "memory"
clober to it to make sure it's ordered.
Which looks correct to me, even if the "almost entirely duplicated" is
a bit annoying.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists