Re: [PATCH 2/3] brcmfmac: dhd_sdio.c: use existing atomic_or primitive

[Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>]

Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com> 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 <brudley@broadcom.com>
> Cc: Arend van Spriel <arend@broadcom.com>
> Cc: "Franky (Zhenhui) Lin" <frankyl@broadcom.com>
> Cc: Hante Meuleman <meuleman@broadcom.com>
> Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
> Cc: Pieter-Paul Giesberts <pieterpg@broadcom.com>
> Cc: Daniel Kim <dekim@broadcom.com>
> Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: brcm80211-dev-list@broadcom.com
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vgupta@synopsys.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vgupta@synopsys.com>

What's the plan with this patch? Should I take it to my
wireless-drivers-next tree or will someone else take it?

-- 
Kalle Valo