On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 06:16:18PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> This patchset introduces atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave() and
> refcount_dec_and_lock_irqsave(). The individual user are not part of
> this series.
> The custom Alpha implementation of atomic_dec_and_lock() is removed
>
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 06:16:18PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> This patchset introduces atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave() and
> refcount_dec_and_lock_irqsave(). The individual user are not part of
> this series.
> The custom Alpha implementation of atomic_dec_and_lock() is removed
>
This patchset introduces atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave() and
refcount_dec_and_lock_irqsave(). The individual user are not part of
this series.
The custom Alpha implementation of atomic_dec_and_lock() is removed
because the decrement operation is not a RELEASE operation (pointed out
by Peter
This patchset introduces atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave() and
refcount_dec_and_lock_irqsave(). The individual user are not part of
this series.
The custom Alpha implementation of atomic_dec_and_lock() is removed
because the decrement operation is not a RELEASE operation (pointed out
by Peter
On 2018-05-23 15:02:41 [+0200], Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 1,5-6:
> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel)
I sucked them into my try tree an noticed this off by one, I applied the
tags to 1,4-5:
*┬─>[PATCH 1/5] spinlock: atomic_dec_and_lock: Add an irqsave variant
├─>[PATCH 2/5] mm/backing-dev: Use
On 2018-05-23 15:02:41 [+0200], Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 1,5-6:
> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel)
I sucked them into my try tree an noticed this off by one, I applied the
tags to 1,4-5:
*┬─>[PATCH 1/5] spinlock: atomic_dec_and_lock: Add an irqsave variant
├─>[PATCH 2/5] mm/backing-dev: Use
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 05:45:28PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> This series introduces atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave() and converts a few
> users to use it. They were using local_irq_save() +
> atomic_dec_and_lock() before that series.
1,5-6:
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel)
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 05:45:28PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> This series introduces atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave() and converts a few
> users to use it. They were using local_irq_save() +
> atomic_dec_and_lock() before that series.
1,5-6:
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel)
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 05:26:40PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:21:02PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:07:26PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> >
> > > do you intend to kill refcount_dec_and_lock() in the longterm?
> >
> > You meant to
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 05:26:40PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:21:02PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:07:26PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> >
> > > do you intend to kill refcount_dec_and_lock() in the longterm?
> >
> > You meant to
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:21:02PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:07:26PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>
> > do you intend to kill refcount_dec_and_lock() in the longterm?
>
> You meant to say atomic_dec_and_lock() ? Dunno if we ever get there, but
>
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:21:02PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:07:26PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>
> > do you intend to kill refcount_dec_and_lock() in the longterm?
>
> You meant to say atomic_dec_and_lock() ? Dunno if we ever get there, but
>
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:07:26PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> do you intend to kill refcount_dec_and_lock() in the longterm?
You meant to say atomic_dec_and_lock() ? Dunno if we ever get there, but
typically dec_and_lock is fairly refcounty, but I suppose it is possible
to have
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:07:26PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> do you intend to kill refcount_dec_and_lock() in the longterm?
You meant to say atomic_dec_and_lock() ? Dunno if we ever get there, but
typically dec_and_lock is fairly refcounty, but I suppose it is possible
to have
On 2018-05-04 17:54:46 [+0200], Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 05:45:28PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > This series introduces atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave() and converts a few
> > users to use it. They were using local_irq_save() +
> > atomic_dec_and_lock() before
On 2018-05-04 17:54:46 [+0200], Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 05:45:28PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > This series introduces atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave() and converts a few
> > users to use it. They were using local_irq_save() +
> > atomic_dec_and_lock() before
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 05:45:28PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> This series introduces atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave() and converts a few
> users to use it. They were using local_irq_save() +
> atomic_dec_and_lock() before that series.
Should not all these users be converted to
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 05:45:28PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> This series introduces atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave() and converts a few
> users to use it. They were using local_irq_save() +
> atomic_dec_and_lock() before that series.
Should not all these users be converted to
This series introduces atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave() and converts a few
users to use it. They were using local_irq_save() +
atomic_dec_and_lock() before that series.
Sebastian
This series introduces atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave() and converts a few
users to use it. They were using local_irq_save() +
atomic_dec_and_lock() before that series.
Sebastian
20 matches
Mail list logo
