On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 06:51:11PM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote:
> > 1bc179880fba docs: atomic_ops: Describe atomic_set as a write operation
> >
> > The above patches need at least one additional Acked-by
> > or Reviewed-by. If any of you gets a chance, please do
> > look them over.
>
> Glad this came out. ;-)
>
> No objection to the patch: feel free to add my Reviewed-by: tag.
Done, thank you!
> (BTW, atomic_set() would be better mapped to WRITE_ONCE()... in fact, to
> be fair, some archs do it the __asm__ __volatile__() way).
>
> I do however have some suggestions concerning "the process": searching
> LKML for the patch and the related discussion, I could only find:
>
> [PATCH] docs: atomic_ops: atomic_set is a write (not read) operation
>
> and I realize that none of the person Cc:-ed in this thread, except you,
> were Cc:-ed in that discussion (in compliance with get_maintainer.pl).
>
> My suggestions:
>
> 1) Merge the file touched by that patch into (the recently created):
>
> Documentation/atomic_t.txt
>
> (FWIW, queued in my TODO list).
Some consolidation of documentation would be good. ;-)
Thoughts from others?
> 2) Add the entry:
>
> F: Documentation/atomic_t.txt
>
> to the "ATOMIC INFRASTRUCTURE" subsystem in the MAINTAINERS file so
> that developers can easily find (the intended?) reviewers for their
> patch. (Of course, this will need ACK from the ATOMIC people).
If the merging will take awhile, it might also be good to put
Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst somewhere as well.
Thanx, Paul
