Re: [cpuops cmpxchg V2 5/5] cpuops: Use cmpxchg for xchg to avoidlock semantics

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 12/16/2010 08:14 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hey, again.
> 
> On 12/15/2010 05:39 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> I'd prefer percpu things going through percpu tree, if for nothing
>> else for git history's sake, but I don't think it really matters.  The
>> series is spread all over the place anyway.  As long as each
>> maintainer is properly alerted about the changes, it should be okay.
>> Please let me know whether you agree with the changes currently queued
>> in percpu#for-next.  I'll update the tree with your Acked-by's and
>> freeze it.
> 
> Are you okay with the patches currently in percpu#for-next?  If so,
> I'll regenerate patches with your acked-by and pop the two previously
> mentioned commits and proceed with the rest of the series.
> 

Just finished reviewing the patches in percpu#for-next.

Acked-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>

Look good.  Let me know when you have a baseline I can pull into a tip
branch so we can build the rest of the patches on top.

	-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/