Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 2 Jul 2018 11:54:15 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        akiyks@gmail.com, boqun.feng@gmail.com, dhowells@redhat.com,
        j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk, luc.maranget@inria.fr, npiggin@gmail.com,
        peterz@infradead.org, stern@rowland.harvard.edu,
        will.deacon@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] tools/memory-model: remove ACCESS_ONCE()
Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
References: <20180628123347.52963-1-mark.rutland@arm.com>
 <20180628123845.GA14456@andrea>
 <20180628152140.GK3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <20180628165111.GA4013@andrea>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180628165111.GA4013@andrea>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Message-Id: <20180702185415.GR3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 06:51:11PM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote:
> > 1bc179880fba docs: atomic_ops: Describe atomic_set as a write operation
> > 
> > 	The above patches need at least one additional Acked-by
> > 	or Reviewed-by.  If any of you gets a chance, please do
> > 	look them over.
> 
> Glad this came out. ;-)
> 
> No objection to the patch: feel free to add my Reviewed-by: tag.

Done, thank you!

> (BTW, atomic_set() would be better mapped to WRITE_ONCE()... in fact, to
>  be fair, some archs do it the __asm__ __volatile__() way).
> 
> I do however have some suggestions concerning "the process":  searching
> LKML for the patch and the related discussion, I could only find:
> 
>   [PATCH] docs: atomic_ops: atomic_set is a write (not read) operation
> 
> and I realize that none of the person Cc:-ed in this thread, except you,
> were Cc:-ed in that discussion (in compliance with get_maintainer.pl).
> 
> My suggestions:
> 
>   1) Merge the file touched by that patch into (the recently created):
>   
>         Documentation/atomic_t.txt
> 
>      (FWIW, queued in my TODO list).

Some consolidation of documentation would be good.  ;-)

Thoughts from others?

>   2) Add the entry:
> 
> 	F: Documentation/atomic_t.txt
> 
>      to the "ATOMIC INFRASTRUCTURE" subsystem in the MAINTAINERS file so
>      that developers can easily find (the intended?) reviewers for their
>      patch. (Of course, this will need ACK from the ATOMIC people).

If the merging will take awhile, it might also be good to put
Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst somewhere as well.

							Thanx, Paul