Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 01:39:08PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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.

Yeah, I know, but I really wasn't expecting new users of this thing, it
seemed like quite an exotic API with very limited users.

A well..