From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752851AbbBXVwi (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Feb 2015 16:52:38 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:34553 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752358AbbBXVwh (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Feb 2015 16:52:37 -0500 Message-ID: <54ECF296.3030301@zytor.com> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 13:52:22 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ross Zwisler CC: Borislav Petkov , hpa@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mingo@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/asm: Add support for the pcommit instruction References: <1424367448-24254-1-git-send-email-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <54EBB439.3040303@zytor.com> <20150224093007.GA3575@pd.tnic> <54ECEFE2.9030107@zytor.com> <54ECF01B.1070101@zytor.com> <1424814530.6833.11.camel@theros.lm.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <1424814530.6833.11.camel@theros.lm.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02/24/2015 01:48 PM, Ross Zwisler wrote: > On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 13:41 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> On 02/24/2015 01:40 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >>> On 02/24/2015 01:30 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: >>>> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 03:14:01PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >>>>> That may cause the same line to be flushed twice. I would suggest, >>>>> instead, also removing the arithmetic on void *: >>>> >>>> Btw, should we hold down all those suggested usages somewhere in >>>> Documentation/x86/ as commit messages are generally harder to find? >>>> >>> >>> Yes, and commit messages can't be corrected after the fact. >>> >> >> Either that, or perhaps even better in kerneldoc comments in the source >> itself. > > Either sounds like a good idea to me. :) Let me know which you'd prefer > and I'll get something written up. > Kerneldoc would be better, as it is more likely to be maintained in proximity for the source. -hpa