[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aMRQIeIdyiWVR8a0@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2025 17:53:53 +0100
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@....com>
Cc: will@...nel.org, broonie@...nel.org, maz@...nel.org,
oliver.upton@...ux.dev, joey.gouly@....com, james.morse@....com,
ardb@...nel.org, scott@...amperecomputing.com,
suzuki.poulose@....com, yuzenghui@...wei.com, mark.rutland@....com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v7 4/6] arm64: futex: refactor futex atomic
operation
On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 04:19:27PM +0100, Yeoreum Yun wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/futex.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/futex.h
> index bc06691d2062..ab7003cb4724 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/futex.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/futex.h
> @@ -7,17 +7,21 @@
>
> #include <linux/futex.h>
> #include <linux/uaccess.h>
> +#include <linux/stringify.h>
>
> #include <asm/errno.h>
>
> -#define FUTEX_MAX_LOOPS 128 /* What's the largest number you can think of? */
> +#define LLSC_MAX_LOOPS 128 /* What's the largest number you can think of? */
I just noticed - you might as well leave the name as is here, especially
if in patch 6 you align down address and use CAS on a 64-bit value as
per Will's comment (and it's no longer LLSC). I think renaming this is
unnecessary.
--
Catalin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists