Re: [PATCH v3 RESEND 3/6] bitmap: Make bitmap_onto() available to users
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Date: 2024-02-21 14:30:20
Also in:
lkml, netdev
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Date: 2024-02-21 14:30:20
Also in:
lkml, netdev
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 02:44:31PM +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 21:17:23 +0200 Andy Shevchenko [off-list ref] wrote:
[...]
quoted
quoted
Now what's the plan ? Andy, do you want to send a v2 of this patch or may I get the patch, modify it according to reviews already present in v1 and integrate it in my current series ?I would like to do that, but under pile of different things. I would try my best but if you have enough time and motivation feel free to take over, address the comments and integrate in your series. I dunno what to do with bitmap_onto(), perhaps in a separate patch we can replace it with bitmap_scatter() (IIUC) with explanation that the former 1) uses atomic ops while being non-atomic as a whole, and b) having quite hard to get documentation. At least that's how I see it, I mean that I would like to leave bitmap_onto() alone and address it separately.I will take the Andy's bitmap_{scatter,gather}() patch in my next iteration. And use bitmap_{scatter,gather}() in my code.
Thank you and sorry that I have no time to finish that. I will be happy to help reviewing if you Cc me.
For bitmap_onto() replacement, nothing will be done in my next iteration as it is out of this series scope.
I agree on this. This will be a separate logical change related to NUMA with explanation and replacement of all callers at once. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko