From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECA7D384258
	for <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Wed,  3 Jun 2026 14:40:24 +0000 (UTC)
Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18
ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116;
	t=1780497625; cv=none; b=GY929htuK+raQgBgS7kewk4hqH0vHclSF+0lk8hNxG4MJ+yyNH54tTzv4OLqEvkdso+EZtTwry9obD+2B7BOmfA/JLGpwZbDwmLoYjyPOVnXua60w/oT++7m73rsOOfFm9Z4pm7uRt2gG8A/NBlsAiTVUv6HRUY0N+p7yZ1TTXE=
ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org;
	s=arc-20240116; t=1780497625; c=relaxed/simple;
	bh=RBwU8GbpScbp2x1PNYnDFSaAtXgQDLNJgiY1VHTvbt4=;
	h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID:
	 MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=uI78KbJelZIIcGIUa119Fkj3IjWD14Zzb+0TXjDGmgAgK/NDhiFY4Nms1DkOZbh9olYLxDhFxGHNDTY7wItB5uFYBHqYyki5Isjj8grq+HIwSJXkiWKiug2V8v36IzfYNZjBdX+FNX4R2YEitYiIeexF3ZykrwdNgHB8bI4DbPA=
ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=E92npx5v; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18
Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org;
	dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="E92npx5v"
Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CB6BB1F00893;
	Wed,  3 Jun 2026 14:40:23 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org;
	s=k20260515; t=1780497624;
	bh=OA6F0GGDH+/dJR8w0RXXOlG33FlKpaQIVuRapOCJfIk=;
	h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date;
	b=E92npx5vv64oX8E8w3Uh75tJ6quNzpJSTy/nzb1ocXnBdOG0hErkncw1SwHxkD/yb
	 Ui8SOTAjOaMMZpp4xO/XZIS22nfA8DqZnASXtlbG9tTHyyHIKc6PaYeFkr1bDS6FEd
	 qoFVP+fAsHYDnT+qvOKjfm4JWiAQivElZ14KafXXnAZsqxBDvvDZuqHZMamykBzJwX
	 Tys4RAb4e/pT4YhyVPNts0b7ndMAwS0accV6MftTuxeL9Ft+4wfUdwr1/uC8i87+aP
	 rtJ6TEeWadGe1YHvcTrVLtsulwRzWpp+KeBVLAbRbgMUWMSsVChd8axZ32EXjIcq10
	 8ztvMTil6pbHg==
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Mathieu Desnoyers
 <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>, =?utf-8?Q?Andr=C3=A9?= Almeida
 <andrealmeid@igalia.com>,
 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>, Carlos O'Donell
 <carlos@redhat.com>, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>, Rich Felker
 <dalias@aerifal.cx>, Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com>, Darren Hart
 <dvhart@infradead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Davidlohr Bueso
 <dave@stgolabs.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, "Liam R . Howlett"
 <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>, Thomas
 =?utf-8?Q?Wei=C3=9Fschuh?= <linux@weissschuh.net>, Mark Brown
 <broonie@kernel.org>, Richard
 Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Subject: Re: [patch V5 09/16] futex: Add support for unlocking robust futexes
In-Reply-To: <20260603082220.GR3102624@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20260602084648.462672743@kernel.org>
 <20260602090535.670514505@kernel.org>
 <20260603082220.GR3102624@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2026 16:40:21 +0200
Message-ID: <87mrxb7kmi.ffs@fw13>
Precedence: bulk
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:linux-kernel+subscribe@vger.kernel.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:linux-kernel+unsubscribe@vger.kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

On Wed, Jun 03 2026 at 10:22, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2026 at 11:09:55AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> --- a/kernel/futex/futex.h
>> +++ b/kernel/futex/futex.h
>> @@ -40,6 +40,8 @@
>>  #define FLAGS_NUMA		0x0080
>>  #define FLAGS_STRICT		0x0100
>>  #define FLAGS_MPOL		0x0200
>> +#define FLAGS_UNLOCK_ROBUST	0x0400
>> +#define FLAGS_ROBUST_LIST32	0x0800
>>  
>>  /* FUTEX_ to FLAGS_ */
>>  static inline unsigned int futex_to_flags(unsigned int op)
>> @@ -52,6 +54,12 @@ static inline unsigned int futex_to_flag
>>  	if (op & FUTEX_CLOCK_REALTIME)
>>  		flags |= FLAGS_CLOCKRT;
>>  
>> +	if (op & FUTEX_UNLOCK_ROBUST)
>> +		flags |= FLAGS_UNLOCK_ROBUST;
>> +
>> +	if (op & FUTEX_ROBUST_LIST32)
>> +		flags |= FLAGS_ROBUST_LIST32;
>> +
>>  	return flags;
>>  }
>>  
>
> Would you mind terribly if I did: 's/UNLOCK_ROBUST/ROBUST_UNLOCK/g' on
> the whole series?

No objections.