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: <f6b5514d-9ad8-59ae-6a86-c9fe5eb81895@collabora.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Sep 2021 15:24:27 -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, tglx@linutronix.de,
        bigeasy@linutronix.de, kernel@collabora.com, krisman@collabora.com,
        linux-api@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
        libc-alpha@sourceware.org, mtk.manpages@gmail.com,
        dave@stgolabs.net, arnd@arndb.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

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.
> 
> Thomas, does something like this work for you?
> 
I tested this patchset:

- On top of a full distro
- Using futex kselftests
- Running glibc's nptl tests, all 387 passed

It seems that things are working as expected. You can add my

	Reviewed-by: André Almeida <andrealmeid@collabora.com>

for patches 01 - 15.