From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 25/26] tile: Remove spin_unlock_wait() arch-specific definitions Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 17:06:16 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20170629235918.GA6445@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1498780894-8253-25-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , NetFilter , Network Development , Oleg Nesterov , Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , Davidlohr Bueso , Manfred Spraul , Tejun Heo , Arnd Bergmann , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Will Deacon , Peter Zijlstra , Alan Stern , Andrea Parri , Chris Metcalf To: "Paul E. McKenney" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1498780894-8253-25-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > There is no agreed-upon definition of spin_unlock_wait()'s semantics, > and it appears that all callers could do just as well with a lock/unlock > pair. This commit therefore removes the underlying arch-specific > arch_spin_unlock_wait(). Please don't make this one commit fopr every architecture. Once something gets removed, it gets removed. There's no point in "remove it from architecture X". If there are no more users, we're done with it, and making it be 25 patches with the same commit message instead of just one doesn't help anybody. Linus