Re: [PATCHv4 01/12] atomic/tty: Fix up atomic abuse in ldsem

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 03:40:48PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > Ok, then these bits will have to wait until Greg's tree goes upstream > > > in about two weeks. > > > > Ok. > > > > > Which patches can I apply as a preparatory step? > > > > Patches 2-6 can be

Re: [PATCHv4 01/12] atomic/tty: Fix up atomic abuse in ldsem

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 03:40:48PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > Ok, then these bits will have to wait until Greg's tree goes upstream > > > in about two weeks. > > > > Ok. > > > > > Which patches can I apply as a preparatory step? > > > > Patches 2-6 can be

Re: [PATCHv4 01/12] atomic/tty: Fix up atomic abuse in ldsem

* Mark Rutland wrote: > > Ok, then these bits will have to wait until Greg's tree goes upstream > > in about two weeks. > > Ok. > > > Which patches can I apply as a preparatory step? > > Patches 2-6 can be applied now. Ok, will apply those. > I guess I should rebase and resend the

Re: [PATCHv4 01/12] atomic/tty: Fix up atomic abuse in ldsem

* Mark Rutland wrote: > > Ok, then these bits will have to wait until Greg's tree goes upstream > > in about two weeks. > > Ok. > > > Which patches can I apply as a preparatory step? > > Patches 2-6 can be applied now. Ok, will apply those. > I guess I should rebase and resend the

Re: [PATCHv4 01/12] atomic/tty: Fix up atomic abuse in ldsem

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 01:13:13PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Mark Rutland wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 11:20:36AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > > > * Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > > > > > > From: Peter

Re: [PATCHv4 01/12] atomic/tty: Fix up atomic abuse in ldsem

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 01:13:13PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Mark Rutland wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 11:20:36AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > > > * Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > > > > > > From: Peter

Re: [PATCHv4 01/12] atomic/tty: Fix up atomic abuse in ldsem

* Mark Rutland wrote: > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 11:20:36AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > * Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > > > > From: Peter Zijlstra > > > > > > > > Mark found ldsem_cmpxchg() needed an (atomic_long_t

Re: [PATCHv4 01/12] atomic/tty: Fix up atomic abuse in ldsem

* Mark Rutland wrote: > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 11:20:36AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > * Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > > > > From: Peter Zijlstra > > > > > > > > Mark found ldsem_cmpxchg() needed an (atomic_long_t

Re: [PATCHv4 01/12] atomic/tty: Fix up atomic abuse in ldsem

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 11:20:36AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > > From: Peter Zijlstra > > > > > > Mark found ldsem_cmpxchg() needed an (atomic_long_t *) cast to keep > > > working after

Re: [PATCHv4 01/12] atomic/tty: Fix up atomic abuse in ldsem

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 11:20:36AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > > From: Peter Zijlstra > > > > > > Mark found ldsem_cmpxchg() needed an (atomic_long_t *) cast to keep > > > working after

Re: [PATCHv4 01/12] atomic/tty: Fix up atomic abuse in ldsem

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Mark Rutland wrote: > > > From: Peter Zijlstra > > > > Mark found ldsem_cmpxchg() needed an (atomic_long_t *) cast to keep > > working after making the atomic_long interface type safe. > > > > Needing casts is bad form, which

Re: [PATCHv4 01/12] atomic/tty: Fix up atomic abuse in ldsem

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Mark Rutland wrote: > > > From: Peter Zijlstra > > > > Mark found ldsem_cmpxchg() needed an (atomic_long_t *) cast to keep > > working after making the atomic_long interface type safe. > > > > Needing casts is bad form, which

Re: [PATCHv4 01/12] atomic/tty: Fix up atomic abuse in ldsem

* Mark Rutland wrote: > From: Peter Zijlstra > > Mark found ldsem_cmpxchg() needed an (atomic_long_t *) cast to keep > working after making the atomic_long interface type safe. > > Needing casts is bad form, which made me look at the code. There are no > ld_semaphore::count users outside of

Re: [PATCHv4 01/12] atomic/tty: Fix up atomic abuse in ldsem

* Mark Rutland wrote: > From: Peter Zijlstra > > Mark found ldsem_cmpxchg() needed an (atomic_long_t *) cast to keep > working after making the atomic_long interface type safe. > > Needing casts is bad form, which made me look at the code. There are no > ld_semaphore::count users outside of

[PATCHv4 01/12] atomic/tty: Fix up atomic abuse in ldsem

From: Peter Zijlstra Mark found ldsem_cmpxchg() needed an (atomic_long_t *) cast to keep working after making the atomic_long interface type safe. Needing casts is bad form, which made me look at the code. There are no ld_semaphore::count users outside of these functions so there is no reason

[PATCHv4 01/12] atomic/tty: Fix up atomic abuse in ldsem

From: Peter Zijlstra Mark found ldsem_cmpxchg() needed an (atomic_long_t *) cast to keep working after making the atomic_long interface type safe. Needing casts is bad form, which made me look at the code. There are no ld_semaphore::count users outside of these functions so there is no reason