Re: [PATCH -v2 14/33] locking,m68k: Implement atomic_fetch_{add,sub,and,or,xor}()
From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Thu Jun 16 2016 - 13:44:55 EST
- Next message: Frank Rowand: "Re: [PATCH v2] of: fix memory leak related to safe_name()"
- Previous message: Andy Lutomirski: "Re: [PATCH 04/13] mm: Track NR_KERNEL_STACK in pages instead of number of stacks"
- In reply to: Andreas Schwab: "Re: [PATCH -v2 14/33] locking,m68k: Implement atomic_fetch_{add,sub,and,or,xor}()"
- Next in thread: Andreas Schwab: "Re: [PATCH -v2 14/33] locking,m68k: Implement atomic_fetch_{add,sub,and,or,xor}()"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 05:04:24PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > If not, do you want me to 'fix' this or just remove the comment?
>
> It's not broken, so nothing to fix.
Its non obvious code, that's usually plenty reason to change it.
Geert, you maintain this stuff, what say you? Is there still a good
reason (like supporting ancient compilers that don't do "+d" for
example) to keep the code as is?
- Next message: Frank Rowand: "Re: [PATCH v2] of: fix memory leak related to safe_name()"
- Previous message: Andy Lutomirski: "Re: [PATCH 04/13] mm: Track NR_KERNEL_STACK in pages instead of number of stacks"
- In reply to: Andreas Schwab: "Re: [PATCH -v2 14/33] locking,m68k: Implement atomic_fetch_{add,sub,and,or,xor}()"
- Next in thread: Andreas Schwab: "Re: [PATCH -v2 14/33] locking,m68k: Implement atomic_fetch_{add,sub,and,or,xor}()"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]