Re: [PATCH 00/20] arch atomic 'cleanup'

[Ingo Molnar]

* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 05:54:06PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > Hi Peter,
> > 
> > On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 02:58:40PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > This series continues the arch atomic rework started with the smp_mb__
> > > interface cleanup.
> > > 
> > > In this series we (mostly) reduce the atomic implementations by eliminating
> > > repetition through use of CPP macros.
> > > 
> > > A future series will use these macros to implement more atomic ops. With these
> > > macros we can end up with more atomic ops while the total LoC still shrinks.
> > > 
> > > Furthermore, rewrite the asm-generic/atomic implementations to require less and
> > > provide more.
> > > 
> > > This series is compile tested on a number of archs, but only boot tested on
> > > x86_64.
> > 
> > What's the status on this series? I'm currently fleshing out 
> > an extension to the atomic API that allows more flexible 
> > acquire/release semantics and it doesn't make sense for me to 
> > copy-paste a bunch of code when I could build it on top of 
> > this instead.
> 
> Its in tip/locking/arch and I suppose its headed for the next 
> merge window.

Correct, there are no known regressions with the tip:locking/arch 
tree so I plan to send those changes to Linus in the merge 
window.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/