From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755472AbdJIVO6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Oct 2017 17:14:58 -0400 Received: from www62.your-server.de ([213.133.104.62]:51128 "EHLO www62.your-server.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755421AbdJIVO4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Oct 2017 17:14:56 -0400 Message-ID: <59DBE6C2.40104@iogearbox.net> Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2017 23:14:42 +0200 From: Daniel Borkmann User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eric Biggers , Hannes Frederic Sowa CC: "David S. Miller" , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jason Baron , Peter Zijlstra , Eric Biggers Subject: Re: [PATCH] once: switch to new jump label API References: <20170821234241.88438-1-ebiggers3@gmail.com> <874lszmoh2.fsf@stressinduktion.org> <20170916040751.GA14238@zzz.localdomain> <20171009202708.GB67463@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20171009202708.GB67463@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated-Sender: daniel@iogearbox.net Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/09/2017 10:27 PM, Eric Biggers wrote: > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 09:07:51PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 02:44:41PM -0400, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: >>> Eric Biggers writes: >>>> From: Eric Biggers >>>> >>>> Switch the DO_ONCE() macro from the deprecated jump label API to the new >>>> one. The new one is more readable, and for DO_ONCE() it also makes the >>>> generated code more icache-friendly: now the one-time initialization >>>> code is placed out-of-line at the jump target, rather than at the inline >>>> fallthrough case. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers >>> >>> Acked-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa >> >>> Thanks! >> >> Great! Who though is the maintainer for this code? It seems it was originally >> taken by David Miller through the networking tree. David, are you taking >> further patches to the "once" functions, or should I be trying to get this into >> -mm, or somewhere else? >> >> Eric > > Ping. Given original code was accepted against net-next tree as major users of the api are networking related anyway, it should be fine here as well to route through this tree. Maybe resend the patch with a [PATCH net-next] in the subject line (as usually done) to make the targeted tree more clear.