Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Message-ID: <5f95dfe2-2e46-d4f2-b864-b9e1f6cec1f9@collabora.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Sep 2021 12:13:55 -0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.1.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/20] futex: splitup and waitv syscall
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@collabora.com,
        krisman@collabora.com, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
        bigeasy@linutronix.de, libc-alpha@sourceware.org,
        rostedt@goodmis.org, mtk.manpages@gmail.com, dave@stgolabs.net,
        arnd@arndb.de, tglx@linutronix.de, dvhart@infradead.org
References: <20210915140710.596174479@infradead.org>
From:   =?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Almeida?= <andrealmeid@collabora.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210915140710.596174479@infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi Peter,

Às 11:07 de 15/09/21, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> Hi,
> 
> Neither Thomas nor myself much liked that futex2.c nor do we think that CONFIG_
> symbol makes much sense.
> 
> However, futex.c is a wee bit long and splitting it up makes sense. So I've
> taken the liberty to replace your initial patch with 15 of my own and then
> rebased the remaining patches on top of that.
> 

Thank you for doing that. futex.c is indeed too big and I believe that
this really make the code easier to read, and the way you organized
makes more sense than the way I did. Maybe even robust could have a
separated file?

Thanks,
	André