From: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>
To: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org,
Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/arch: Move qrwlock.h include after qspinlock.h
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 17:19:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210210161942.GA5683@alpha.franken.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210210144556.10932-1-longman@redhat.com>
On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 09:45:56AM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> The queued rwlock code has a dependency on the current spinlock
> implementation (likely to be qspinlock), but not vice versa. Including
> qrwlock.h before qspinlock.h can be problematic when expanding qrwlock
> functionality.
>
> If both qspinlock.h and qrwlock.h are to be included, the qrwlock.h
> include should always be after qspinlock.h. Update the current set of
> asm/spinlock.h files to enforce that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h | 2 +-
> arch/mips/include/asm/spinlock.h | 2 +-
> arch/xtensa/include/asm/spinlock.h | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
which tree should this go through ? I can take it via mips-next,
if everybody agrees.
Thomas.
--
Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a
good idea. [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>
To: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>,
linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/arch: Move qrwlock.h include after qspinlock.h
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 17:19:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210210161942.GA5683@alpha.franken.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210210144556.10932-1-longman@redhat.com>
On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 09:45:56AM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> The queued rwlock code has a dependency on the current spinlock
> implementation (likely to be qspinlock), but not vice versa. Including
> qrwlock.h before qspinlock.h can be problematic when expanding qrwlock
> functionality.
>
> If both qspinlock.h and qrwlock.h are to be included, the qrwlock.h
> include should always be after qspinlock.h. Update the current set of
> asm/spinlock.h files to enforce that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h | 2 +-
> arch/mips/include/asm/spinlock.h | 2 +-
> arch/xtensa/include/asm/spinlock.h | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
which tree should this go through ? I can take it via mips-next,
if everybody agrees.
Thomas.
--
Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a
good idea. [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-10 16:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-10 14:45 [PATCH] locking/arch: Move qrwlock.h include after qspinlock.h Waiman Long
2021-02-10 14:45 ` Waiman Long
2021-02-10 15:05 ` Guenter Roeck
2021-02-10 15:05 ` Guenter Roeck
2021-02-10 15:53 ` Waiman Long
2021-02-10 15:53 ` Waiman Long
2021-02-10 17:33 ` Ben Gardon
2021-02-10 17:33 ` Ben Gardon
2021-02-10 16:19 ` Thomas Bogendoerfer [this message]
2021-02-10 16:19 ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2021-02-11 12:59 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-02-11 12:59 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-02-11 14:41 ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2021-02-11 14:41 ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2021-02-10 18:28 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-02-10 18:28 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-02-10 18:50 ` Waiman Long
2021-02-10 18:50 ` Waiman Long
2021-02-10 18:33 Paolo Bonzini
2021-02-10 18:33 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-02-10 18:33 ` Paolo Bonzini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210210161942.GA5683@alpha.franken.de \
--to=tsbogend@alpha.franken.de \
--cc=bgardon@google.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=chris@zankel.net \
--cc=jcmvbkbc@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=naresh.kamboju@linaro.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.