On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 11:20:49AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 11:18:01AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 08:21:27PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 05:38:06PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 11:19:01AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > > This series contains a few cleanups of the atomic API, fixing > > > > > inconsistencies between atomic_* and atomic64_*, and minimizing > > > > > repetition in arch code. This is nicer for arch code, and the improved > > > > > regularity will help when generating the atomic headers in future. > > > > > > > > Apart from the Alpha patch: > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Will Deacon <will.dea...@arm.com> > > > > > > Cheers! I assume that also holds with patch 7 fixes up to use s64. > > > > I've pushed out the series with those fixes and your Reviewed-by tags. > > > > Given the whole series has your Reviewed-By and Peter's Acked-by, I > > assume that you're both happy for this to be queued? > > > > What's your prefered way for that to happen? Should I send a v4 with > > those fixes, a pull request, or are you happy to fetch that in a little > > while regardless? > > Probably best to send a v4, then Ingo can take it all via -tip.
Ok. > Before you do that, can you also spell-check your commit messages > please? I spotted a bunch of silly typos, and it will save Ingo from > having to fix them up if you do it first. Sorry about that. I've gone through those now, and fixed what I have spotted. I'll give it another pass before I post v4, just in case. :) Thanks, Mark.
