Re: [PATCH 2/3] brcmfmac: dhd_sdio.c: use existing atomic_or primitive

[Arend van Spriel <arend@broadcom.com>]

On 07/24/2015 07:22 PM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> On Friday 24 July 2015 08:02 PM, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com> writes:
>>
>>>> There's already a generic implementation so use that instead.
>>>> ---
>>>> I'm not sure if the driver usage of atomic_or?() is correct in terms of
>>>> storage size of @val for 64 bit arches.
>>>>
>>>> Assuming LP64 programming model for linux on say x86_64: atomic_or()
>>>> callers in this driver use long (sana 64 bit) storage and pass it to
>>>> atomic_orr/atomic_or which downcasts it to 32 bits. Is that OK ?
>>>> ---
>>>> Cc: Brett Rudley <brudley@broadcom.com>
>>>> Cc: Arend van Spriel <arend@broadcom.com>
>>>> Cc: "Franky (Zhenhui) Lin" <frankyl@broadcom.com>
>>>> Cc: Hante Meuleman <meuleman@broadcom.com>
>>>> Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
>>>> Cc: Pieter-Paul Giesberts <pieterpg@broadcom.com>
>>>> Cc: Daniel Kim <dekim@broadcom.com>
>>>> Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
>>>> Cc: brcm80211-dev-list@broadcom.com
>>>> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>>>> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
>>>> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
>>>> Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
>>>> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>>>> Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vgupta@synopsys.com>
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vgupta@synopsys.com>
>> What's the plan with this patch? Should I take it to my
>> wireless-drivers-next tree or will someone else take it?
>
>
> Per last discussion on this topic, Arend wanted to discuss abt this with Hante.
> I'm not taking it anyways so feel free to pick it up if you want !

Well, that was before your "timeline" clarification about the generic 
function. One what tree is this patch based?

Regards,
Arend