Return-path: Received: from mail-gw3-out.broadcom.com ([216.31.210.64]:31252 "EHLO mail-gw3-out.broadcom.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753063AbbGZLMo (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Jul 2015 07:12:44 -0400 Message-ID: <55B4C0A8.9000909@broadcom.com> (sfid-20150726_131309_996879_BA3F81EB) Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2015 13:12:40 +0200 From: Arend van Spriel MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vineet Gupta , Kalle Valo , Vineet Gupta CC: Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Arnd Bergmann , , , Brett Rudley , "Franky (Zhenhui) Lin" , Hante Meuleman , Pieter-Paul Giesberts , Daniel Kim , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] brcmfmac: dhd_sdio.c: use existing atomic_or primitive References: <1436429599-10762-1-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com> <1436429599-10762-3-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com> <87twstbi9p.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> <55B2743F.6060304@synopsys.com> In-Reply-To: <55B2743F.6060304@synopsys.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/24/2015 07:22 PM, Vineet Gupta wrote: > On Friday 24 July 2015 08:02 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: >> Vineet Gupta writes: >> >>>> There's already a generic implementation so use that instead. >>>> --- >>>> I'm not sure if the driver usage of atomic_or?() is correct in terms of >>>> storage size of @val for 64 bit arches. >>>> >>>> Assuming LP64 programming model for linux on say x86_64: atomic_or() >>>> callers in this driver use long (sana 64 bit) storage and pass it to >>>> atomic_orr/atomic_or which downcasts it to 32 bits. Is that OK ? >>>> --- >>>> Cc: Brett Rudley >>>> Cc: Arend van Spriel >>>> Cc: "Franky (Zhenhui) Lin" >>>> Cc: Hante Meuleman >>>> Cc: Kalle Valo >>>> Cc: Pieter-Paul Giesberts >>>> Cc: Daniel Kim >>>> Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org >>>> Cc: brcm80211-dev-list@broadcom.com >>>> Cc: Peter Zijlstra >>>> Cc: Ingo Molnar >>>> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org >>>> Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org >>>> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>>> Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta >> What's the plan with this patch? Should I take it to my >> wireless-drivers-next tree or will someone else take it? > > > Per last discussion on this topic, Arend wanted to discuss abt this with Hante. > I'm not taking it anyways so feel free to pick it up if you want ! Well, that was before your "timeline" clarification about the generic function. One what tree is this patch based? Regards, Arend