From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 14:42:02 +0200 Message-ID: <20180403124202.GD4082@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20180403093030.GB4082@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180403154122.00d76d61@canb.auug.org.au> <29149.1522759148@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <29149.1522759148@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: David Howells Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , David Miller , Networking , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 01:39:08PM +0100, David Howells wrote: > Peter Zijlstra 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..