From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 05:06:33 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH v4] syscalls/membarrier: Add membarrier() initial
 test
In-Reply-To: <54dd0c4a-e843-38b6-ee26-021353cbfb31@linaro.org>
References: <243767154.55279006.1538383679362.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
 <20181008132914.8246-1-rafael.tinoco@linaro.org>
 <1320883984.56890565.1539007652586.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
 <75dc7e79-ddc2-f5ee-4fb5-dfcb7385e4df@linaro.org>
 <357830099.56894195.1539008719156.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
 <54dd0c4a-e843-38b6-ee26-021353cbfb31@linaro.org>
Message-ID: <1573563504.57641045.1539248793339.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
List-Id: <ltp.lists.linux.it>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: ltp@lists.linux.it



----- Original Message -----
> On 10/8/18 11:25 AM, Jan Stancek wrote:
> >>> Looks good to me.
> >>>
> >>> We probably can drop linux/membarrier.h configure check, right?
> >>> (since v4 doesn't include it and unsupported kernel should
> >>> hit ENOSYS and TCONF)
> 
> >> Ooops, true. No need to check HAVE_LINUX_MEMBARRIER_H if we are
> >> declaring all CMDs and will be given ENOSYS. Want me to send a v5 ?
> 
> > Let's give a couple days to other potential reviewers. If nothing
> > else comes up, I can drop it before push.
> 
> Thanks a lot for reviewing this.

Pushed.

Regards,
Jan