Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 0/7] Introduce __xchg, non-atomic xchg

From: Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@intel.com>
To: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, openrisc@lists.librecores.org,
	loongarch@lists.linux.dev, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 0/7] Introduce __xchg, non-atomic xchg
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2024 18:20:11 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <340d23fc-7abf-4ad0-bd95-f1760b9ac458@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87r0fjc1cz.fsf@intel.com>

On 05.04.2024 16:47, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2023, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 10:24:19PM +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
>>> On 22.02.2023 18:04, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 04:35:22PM +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Andrzej Hajda (7):
>>>>>     arch: rename all internal names __xchg to __arch_xchg
>>>>>     linux/include: add non-atomic version of xchg
>>>>>     arch/*/uprobes: simplify arch_uretprobe_hijack_return_addr
>>>>>     llist: simplify __llist_del_all
>>>>>     io_uring: use __xchg if possible
>>>>>     qed: use __xchg if possible
>>>>>     drm/i915/gt: use __xchg instead of internal helper
>>>> Nothing crazy in here I suppose, I somewhat wonder why you went through
>>>> the trouble, but meh.
>>> If you are asking why I have proposed this patchset, then the answer is
>>> simple, 1st I've tried to find a way to move internal i915 helper to core
>>> (see patch 7).
>>> Then I was looking for possible other users of this helper. And apparently
>>> there are many of them, patches 3-7 shows some.
>>>
>>>
>>>> You want me to take this through te locking tree (for the next cycle,
>>>> not this one) where I normally take atomic things or does someone else
>>>> want this?
>>> If you could take it I will be happy.
>> OK, I'll go queue it in tip/locking/core after -rc1. Thanks!
> Is this where the series fell between the cracks, or was there some
> follow-up that I missed?
>
> I think this would still be useful. Andrzej, would you mind rebasing and
> resending if there are no objections?

The patchset was rejected/dropped by Linus at the pull-request stage.
He didn't like many things, but the most __xchg name. However he was 
quite positive about i915 name fetch_and_zero.
I can try to revive patchset with fetch_and_zero, and maybe 
fetch_and_set, instead of __xchg.

Regards
Andrzej

>
> BR,
> Jani.
>
>