* [PATCH] bit_spinlock: Include <asm/processor.h> @ 2023-01-08 19:04 ` Christophe JAILLET 0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Christophe JAILLET @ 2023-01-08 19:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg Kroah-Hartman, Vineet Gupta, Dan Carpenter Cc: linux-snps-arc, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors, Christophe JAILLET In an attempt to simplify some includes in <include/dcache.h>, it appeared, when compiling fs/ecryptfs/dentry.c, that <linux/bit_spinlock.h> was relying on other includes to get the definition of cpu_relax(). (see [1]) It broke on arc. Include <asm/processor.h> in <linux/bit_spinlock.h> to fix the issue. This will help remove some un-needed includes from <include/dcache.h>. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202301082130.LXMj5qkD-lkp@intel.com/ Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> --- Not sure who to send this to. get_maintainer.pl is of no help, and the file is untouched from a too long time. Greg? Dan? Any pointer? --- include/linux/bit_spinlock.h | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h index bbc4730a6505..d0fd2a7afca2 100644 --- a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h +++ b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ #ifndef __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H #define __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H +#include <asm/processor.h> #include <linux/kernel.h> #include <linux/preempt.h> #include <linux/atomic.h> -- 2.34.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] bit_spinlock: Include <asm/processor.h> @ 2023-01-08 19:04 ` Christophe JAILLET 0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Christophe JAILLET @ 2023-01-08 19:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg Kroah-Hartman, Vineet Gupta, Dan Carpenter Cc: linux-snps-arc, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors, Christophe JAILLET In an attempt to simplify some includes in <include/dcache.h>, it appeared, when compiling fs/ecryptfs/dentry.c, that <linux/bit_spinlock.h> was relying on other includes to get the definition of cpu_relax(). (see [1]) It broke on arc. Include <asm/processor.h> in <linux/bit_spinlock.h> to fix the issue. This will help remove some un-needed includes from <include/dcache.h>. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202301082130.LXMj5qkD-lkp@intel.com/ Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> --- Not sure who to send this to. get_maintainer.pl is of no help, and the file is untouched from a too long time. Greg? Dan? Any pointer? --- include/linux/bit_spinlock.h | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h index bbc4730a6505..d0fd2a7afca2 100644 --- a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h +++ b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ #ifndef __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H #define __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H +#include <asm/processor.h> #include <linux/kernel.h> #include <linux/preempt.h> #include <linux/atomic.h> -- 2.34.1 _______________________________________________ linux-snps-arc mailing list linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] bit_spinlock: Include <asm/processor.h> 2023-01-08 19:04 ` Christophe JAILLET @ 2023-01-09 8:26 ` Dan Carpenter -1 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Dan Carpenter @ 2023-01-09 8:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christophe JAILLET Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman, Vineet Gupta, linux-snps-arc, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors On Sun, Jan 08, 2023 at 08:04:44PM +0100, Christophe JAILLET wrote: > In an attempt to simplify some includes in <include/dcache.h>, it > appeared, when compiling fs/ecryptfs/dentry.c, that <linux/bit_spinlock.h> > was relying on other includes to get the definition of cpu_relax(). > (see [1]) > > It broke on arc. > > Include <asm/processor.h> in <linux/bit_spinlock.h> to fix the issue. > This will help remove some un-needed includes from <include/dcache.h>. > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202301082130.LXMj5qkD-lkp@intel.com/ > > Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> > --- > Not sure who to send this to. > get_maintainer.pl is of no help, and the file is untouched from a too long > time. > > Greg? Dan? Any pointer? Andrew Morton is the maintainer of last resort. Plus spinlocks seem like something he would be interested in. Otherwise Ingo, Peter Z and the x86 team. regards, dan carpenter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] bit_spinlock: Include <asm/processor.h> @ 2023-01-09 8:26 ` Dan Carpenter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Dan Carpenter @ 2023-01-09 8:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christophe JAILLET Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman, Vineet Gupta, linux-snps-arc, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors On Sun, Jan 08, 2023 at 08:04:44PM +0100, Christophe JAILLET wrote: > In an attempt to simplify some includes in <include/dcache.h>, it > appeared, when compiling fs/ecryptfs/dentry.c, that <linux/bit_spinlock.h> > was relying on other includes to get the definition of cpu_relax(). > (see [1]) > > It broke on arc. > > Include <asm/processor.h> in <linux/bit_spinlock.h> to fix the issue. > This will help remove some un-needed includes from <include/dcache.h>. > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202301082130.LXMj5qkD-lkp@intel.com/ > > Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> > --- > Not sure who to send this to. > get_maintainer.pl is of no help, and the file is untouched from a too long > time. > > Greg? Dan? Any pointer? Andrew Morton is the maintainer of last resort. Plus spinlocks seem like something he would be interested in. Otherwise Ingo, Peter Z and the x86 team. regards, dan carpenter _______________________________________________ linux-snps-arc mailing list linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] bit_spinlock: Include <asm/processor.h> 2023-01-08 19:04 ` Christophe JAILLET @ 2023-01-09 22:46 ` Andrew Morton -1 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2023-01-09 22:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christophe JAILLET Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman, Vineet Gupta, Dan Carpenter, linux-snps-arc, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors On Sun, 8 Jan 2023 20:04:44 +0100 Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> wrote: > In an attempt to simplify some includes in <include/dcache.h>, it > appeared, when compiling fs/ecryptfs/dentry.c, that <linux/bit_spinlock.h> > was relying on other includes to get the definition of cpu_relax(). > (see [1]) > > It broke on arc. > > Include <asm/processor.h> in <linux/bit_spinlock.h> to fix the issue. > This will help remove some un-needed includes from <include/dcache.h>. > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202301082130.LXMj5qkD-lkp@intel.com/ > > ... > > --- a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h > +++ b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h > @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ > #ifndef __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H > #define __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H > > +#include <asm/processor.h> > #include <linux/kernel.h> > #include <linux/preempt.h> > #include <linux/atomic.h> linux/processor.h would be preferable, rather than diving straight into asm/? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] bit_spinlock: Include <asm/processor.h> @ 2023-01-09 22:46 ` Andrew Morton 0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2023-01-09 22:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christophe JAILLET Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman, Vineet Gupta, Dan Carpenter, linux-snps-arc, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors On Sun, 8 Jan 2023 20:04:44 +0100 Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> wrote: > In an attempt to simplify some includes in <include/dcache.h>, it > appeared, when compiling fs/ecryptfs/dentry.c, that <linux/bit_spinlock.h> > was relying on other includes to get the definition of cpu_relax(). > (see [1]) > > It broke on arc. > > Include <asm/processor.h> in <linux/bit_spinlock.h> to fix the issue. > This will help remove some un-needed includes from <include/dcache.h>. > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202301082130.LXMj5qkD-lkp@intel.com/ > > ... > > --- a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h > +++ b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h > @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ > #ifndef __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H > #define __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H > > +#include <asm/processor.h> > #include <linux/kernel.h> > #include <linux/preempt.h> > #include <linux/atomic.h> linux/processor.h would be preferable, rather than diving straight into asm/? _______________________________________________ linux-snps-arc mailing list linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] bit_spinlock: Include <asm/processor.h> 2023-01-08 19:04 ` Christophe JAILLET @ 2023-01-10 7:19 ` Vineet Gupta -1 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Vineet Gupta @ 2023-01-10 7:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christophe JAILLET, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Vineet Gupta, Dan Carpenter Cc: linux-snps-arc, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors On 1/8/23 11:04, Christophe JAILLET wrote: > In an attempt to simplify some includes in <include/dcache.h>, it > appeared, when compiling fs/ecryptfs/dentry.c, that <linux/bit_spinlock.h> > was relying on other includes to get the definition of cpu_relax(). > (see [1]) > > It broke on arc. It its just ARC that broke, maybe we can do something there ? > Include <asm/processor.h> in <linux/bit_spinlock.h> to fix the issue. > This will help remove some un-needed includes from <include/dcache.h>. > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202301082130.LXMj5qkD-lkp@intel.com/ > > Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> > --- > Not sure who to send this to. > get_maintainer.pl is of no help, and the file is untouched from a too long > time. > > Greg? Dan? Any pointer? > --- > include/linux/bit_spinlock.h | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h > index bbc4730a6505..d0fd2a7afca2 100644 > --- a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h > +++ b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h > @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ > #ifndef __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H > #define __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H > > +#include <asm/processor.h> > #include <linux/kernel.h> > #include <linux/preempt.h> > #include <linux/atomic.h> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] bit_spinlock: Include <asm/processor.h> @ 2023-01-10 7:19 ` Vineet Gupta 0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Vineet Gupta @ 2023-01-10 7:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christophe JAILLET, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Vineet Gupta, Dan Carpenter Cc: linux-snps-arc, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors On 1/8/23 11:04, Christophe JAILLET wrote: > In an attempt to simplify some includes in <include/dcache.h>, it > appeared, when compiling fs/ecryptfs/dentry.c, that <linux/bit_spinlock.h> > was relying on other includes to get the definition of cpu_relax(). > (see [1]) > > It broke on arc. It its just ARC that broke, maybe we can do something there ? > Include <asm/processor.h> in <linux/bit_spinlock.h> to fix the issue. > This will help remove some un-needed includes from <include/dcache.h>. > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202301082130.LXMj5qkD-lkp@intel.com/ > > Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> > --- > Not sure who to send this to. > get_maintainer.pl is of no help, and the file is untouched from a too long > time. > > Greg? Dan? Any pointer? > --- > include/linux/bit_spinlock.h | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h > index bbc4730a6505..d0fd2a7afca2 100644 > --- a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h > +++ b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h > @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ > #ifndef __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H > #define __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H > > +#include <asm/processor.h> > #include <linux/kernel.h> > #include <linux/preempt.h> > #include <linux/atomic.h> _______________________________________________ linux-snps-arc mailing list linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] bit_spinlock: Include <asm/processor.h> 2023-01-10 7:19 ` Vineet Gupta @ 2023-01-10 18:08 ` Christophe JAILLET -1 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Christophe JAILLET @ 2023-01-10 18:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vineet Gupta, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dan Carpenter, Andrew Morton Cc: linux-snps-arc, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors Le 10/01/2023 à 08:19, Vineet Gupta a écrit : > > On 1/8/23 11:04, Christophe JAILLET wrote: >> In an attempt to simplify some includes in <include/dcache.h>, it >> appeared, when compiling fs/ecryptfs/dentry.c, that >> <linux/bit_spinlock.h> >> was relying on other includes to get the definition of cpu_relax(). >> (see [1]) >> >> It broke on arc. > > It its just ARC that broke, maybe we can do something there ? Hi, It is all what build-bots have spotted so far :) I don't think that "fixing" it in ARC is the right approach, unless I missed something. <linux/bit_spinlock.h> does use cpu_relax(), so it should include what is need for that, and not rely on other black magic. CJ > >> Include <asm/processor.h> in <linux/bit_spinlock.h> to fix the issue. >> This will help remove some un-needed includes from <include/dcache.h>. >> >> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202301082130.LXMj5qkD-lkp@intel.com/ >> >> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> >> --- >> Not sure who to send this to. >> get_maintainer.pl is of no help, and the file is untouched from a too >> long >> time. >> >> Greg? Dan? Any pointer? >> --- >> include/linux/bit_spinlock.h | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h >> index bbc4730a6505..d0fd2a7afca2 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h >> +++ b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h >> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ >> #ifndef __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H >> #define __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H >> +#include <asm/processor.h> >> #include <linux/kernel.h> >> #include <linux/preempt.h> >> #include <linux/atomic.h> > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] bit_spinlock: Include <asm/processor.h> @ 2023-01-10 18:08 ` Christophe JAILLET 0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Christophe JAILLET @ 2023-01-10 18:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vineet Gupta, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dan Carpenter, Andrew Morton Cc: linux-snps-arc, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors Le 10/01/2023 à 08:19, Vineet Gupta a écrit : > > On 1/8/23 11:04, Christophe JAILLET wrote: >> In an attempt to simplify some includes in <include/dcache.h>, it >> appeared, when compiling fs/ecryptfs/dentry.c, that >> <linux/bit_spinlock.h> >> was relying on other includes to get the definition of cpu_relax(). >> (see [1]) >> >> It broke on arc. > > It its just ARC that broke, maybe we can do something there ? Hi, It is all what build-bots have spotted so far :) I don't think that "fixing" it in ARC is the right approach, unless I missed something. <linux/bit_spinlock.h> does use cpu_relax(), so it should include what is need for that, and not rely on other black magic. CJ > >> Include <asm/processor.h> in <linux/bit_spinlock.h> to fix the issue. >> This will help remove some un-needed includes from <include/dcache.h>. >> >> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202301082130.LXMj5qkD-lkp@intel.com/ >> >> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> >> --- >> Not sure who to send this to. >> get_maintainer.pl is of no help, and the file is untouched from a too >> long >> time. >> >> Greg? Dan? Any pointer? >> --- >> include/linux/bit_spinlock.h | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h >> index bbc4730a6505..d0fd2a7afca2 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h >> +++ b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h >> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ >> #ifndef __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H >> #define __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H >> +#include <asm/processor.h> >> #include <linux/kernel.h> >> #include <linux/preempt.h> >> #include <linux/atomic.h> > > _______________________________________________ linux-snps-arc mailing list linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] bit_spinlock: Include <asm/processor.h> 2023-01-10 18:08 ` Christophe JAILLET @ 2023-01-10 21:23 ` Al Viro -1 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Al Viro @ 2023-01-10 21:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christophe JAILLET Cc: Vineet Gupta, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dan Carpenter, Andrew Morton, linux-snps-arc, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 07:08:33PM +0100, Christophe JAILLET wrote: > Le 10/01/2023 à 08:19, Vineet Gupta a écrit : > > > > On 1/8/23 11:04, Christophe JAILLET wrote: > > > In an attempt to simplify some includes in <include/dcache.h>, it > > > appeared, when compiling fs/ecryptfs/dentry.c, that > > > <linux/bit_spinlock.h> > > > was relying on other includes to get the definition of cpu_relax(). > > > (see [1]) > > > > > > It broke on arc. > > > > It its just ARC that broke, maybe we can do something there ? > > Hi, > > It is all what build-bots have spotted so far :) > > I don't think that "fixing" it in ARC is the right approach, unless I missed > something. > > <linux/bit_spinlock.h> does use cpu_relax(), so it should include what is > need for that, and not rely on other black magic. Umm... That's not obvious - it only uses cpu_relax() in macros, so missing include would not cause problems if all actual users of those macros happen to pull the needed header by other means. Said that, we have 1) defined directly in asm/processor.h, using nothing but the stuff provided by compiler.h: alpha, arc, csky, loongarch, m68k, microblaze, nios2, openrisc, parisc, s390, sh, xtensa 2) same, using something in headers pulled by asm/processor.h itself: ia64 (needs asm/intrinsic.h) hexagon (needs asm/hexagon_vm.h) um (needs arch/um/include/linux/time-internal.h) 3) same, but defined in something pulled by asm/processor.h rather than in asm/processor.h itself; asm/vdso/processor.h is the common location - those are the cases when we share the same definition for kernel and vdso builds sparc (asm/processor_32.h or asm/processor_64.h) arm (asm/vdso/processor.h) arm64 (asm/vdso/processor.h) powerpc (asm/vdso/processor.h) x86 (asm/vdso/processor.h) riscv (asm/vdso/processor.h; needs several headers included there - jump_label.h, etc.) mips (asm/vdso/processor.h, needs asm/barrier.h, pulled from asm/processor.h by way of linux/atomic.h -> asm/atomic.h -> asm/barrier.h) So asm/processor.h is sufficient for working cpu_relax() and if some arch-independent code wants cpu_relax() it should pull either asm/processor.h or linux/processor.h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] bit_spinlock: Include <asm/processor.h> @ 2023-01-10 21:23 ` Al Viro 0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Al Viro @ 2023-01-10 21:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christophe JAILLET Cc: Vineet Gupta, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Dan Carpenter, Andrew Morton, linux-snps-arc, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 07:08:33PM +0100, Christophe JAILLET wrote: > Le 10/01/2023 à 08:19, Vineet Gupta a écrit : > > > > On 1/8/23 11:04, Christophe JAILLET wrote: > > > In an attempt to simplify some includes in <include/dcache.h>, it > > > appeared, when compiling fs/ecryptfs/dentry.c, that > > > <linux/bit_spinlock.h> > > > was relying on other includes to get the definition of cpu_relax(). > > > (see [1]) > > > > > > It broke on arc. > > > > It its just ARC that broke, maybe we can do something there ? > > Hi, > > It is all what build-bots have spotted so far :) > > I don't think that "fixing" it in ARC is the right approach, unless I missed > something. > > <linux/bit_spinlock.h> does use cpu_relax(), so it should include what is > need for that, and not rely on other black magic. Umm... That's not obvious - it only uses cpu_relax() in macros, so missing include would not cause problems if all actual users of those macros happen to pull the needed header by other means. Said that, we have 1) defined directly in asm/processor.h, using nothing but the stuff provided by compiler.h: alpha, arc, csky, loongarch, m68k, microblaze, nios2, openrisc, parisc, s390, sh, xtensa 2) same, using something in headers pulled by asm/processor.h itself: ia64 (needs asm/intrinsic.h) hexagon (needs asm/hexagon_vm.h) um (needs arch/um/include/linux/time-internal.h) 3) same, but defined in something pulled by asm/processor.h rather than in asm/processor.h itself; asm/vdso/processor.h is the common location - those are the cases when we share the same definition for kernel and vdso builds sparc (asm/processor_32.h or asm/processor_64.h) arm (asm/vdso/processor.h) arm64 (asm/vdso/processor.h) powerpc (asm/vdso/processor.h) x86 (asm/vdso/processor.h) riscv (asm/vdso/processor.h; needs several headers included there - jump_label.h, etc.) mips (asm/vdso/processor.h, needs asm/barrier.h, pulled from asm/processor.h by way of linux/atomic.h -> asm/atomic.h -> asm/barrier.h) So asm/processor.h is sufficient for working cpu_relax() and if some arch-independent code wants cpu_relax() it should pull either asm/processor.h or linux/processor.h _______________________________________________ linux-snps-arc mailing list linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-01-10 21:23 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2023-01-08 19:04 [PATCH] bit_spinlock: Include <asm/processor.h> Christophe JAILLET 2023-01-08 19:04 ` Christophe JAILLET 2023-01-09 8:26 ` Dan Carpenter 2023-01-09 8:26 ` Dan Carpenter 2023-01-09 22:46 ` Andrew Morton 2023-01-09 22:46 ` Andrew Morton 2023-01-10 7:19 ` Vineet Gupta 2023-01-10 7:19 ` Vineet Gupta 2023-01-10 18:08 ` Christophe JAILLET 2023-01-10 18:08 ` Christophe JAILLET 2023-01-10 21:23 ` Al Viro 2023-01-10 21:23 ` Al Viro
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.