[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <29149.1522759148@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2018 13:39:08 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> I figured that since there were only a handful of users it wasn't a
> popular API, also David very much knew of those patches changing it so
> could easily have pulled in the special tip/sched/wait branch :/
I'm not sure I could, since I have to base on net-next. I'm not sure what
DaveM's policy on that is.
Also, it might've been better not to simply erase the atomic_t wait API
immediately, but substitute wrappers for it to be removed one iteration hence.
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists