On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 10:19:24AM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 05:12:24 PDT (-0700), andrea.pa...@amarulasolutions.com > wrote: > > The barriers are unused; remove their definition. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri <andrea.pa...@amarulasolutions.com> > > Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <pal...@sifive.com> > > Cc: Albert Ou <a...@eecs.berkeley.edu> > > Cc: <linux-ri...@lists.infradead.org> > > --- > > arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h | 5 ----- > > 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h > > b/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h > > index f30daf26f08f4..01db98dfd0435 100644 > > --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h > > +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h > > @@ -23,11 +23,6 @@ > > #include <asm/barrier.h> > > #include <asm/bitsperlong.h> > > > > -#ifndef smp_mb__before_clear_bit > > -#define smp_mb__before_clear_bit() smp_mb() > > -#define smp_mb__after_clear_bit() smp_mb() > > -#endif /* smp_mb__before_clear_bit */ > > - > > #include <asm-generic/bitops/__ffs.h> > > #include <asm-generic/bitops/ffz.h> > > #include <asm-generic/bitops/fls.h> > > Reviewed-by: Palmer Dabbelt <pal...@sifive.com>
Thank you. > > Do you want me to take this via the RISC-V tree? I only ended up with patch > 1/2 in my inbox, and I probably shouldn't take both. I expected this to go via the RISC-V tree and 2/2 via the H8/300 tree, but really no preference from me as long as they get upstreamed. ;-) Thanks, Andrea > > Thanks!
