Re: [PATCH 0/4] list.h/treewide: get rid of no-op prefetch()

On Wed, 07 May 2025 14:12:42 +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > While looking through list.h, I saw that the regular list_* helpers > (and one of the hlist_* ones) still contain the prefetch() that was > removed in linux 14 years ago. It doesn't do anything, but makes the > macros harder to read, so

Re: [PATCH 0/4] list.h/treewide: get rid of no-op prefetch()

On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 08:23:02AM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > On Thu, May 22 2025, Tom Rini wrote: > > > On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 02:12:42PM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > > > >> While looking through list.h, I saw that the regular list_* helpers > >> (and one of the hlist_* ones) still co

Re: [PATCH 0/4] list.h/treewide: get rid of no-op prefetch()

On Thu, May 22 2025, Tom Rini wrote: > On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 02:12:42PM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > >> While looking through list.h, I saw that the regular list_* helpers >> (and one of the hlist_* ones) still contain the prefetch() that was >> removed in linux 14 years ago. It doesn't do

Re: [PATCH 0/4] list.h/treewide: get rid of no-op prefetch()

On Mon, May 26 2025, Tom Rini wrote: > On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 11:10:33PM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: >> On Sun, May 25 2025, Tom Rini wrote: >> >> > On Sun, May 25, 2025 at 10:07:56PM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: >> >> >> >> :( so we've been relying on that prefetch() laundering away the

Re: [PATCH 0/4] list.h/treewide: get rid of no-op prefetch()

On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 11:10:33PM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > On Sun, May 25 2025, Tom Rini wrote: > > > On Sun, May 25, 2025 at 10:07:56PM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > >> > >> :( so we've been relying on that prefetch() laundering away the > >> volatile. > >> > >> Which really begs t

Re: [PATCH 0/4] list.h/treewide: get rid of no-op prefetch()

On Sun, May 25 2025, Tom Rini wrote: > On Sun, May 25, 2025 at 10:07:56PM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: >> >> :( so we've been relying on that prefetch() laundering away the >> volatile. >> >> Which really begs the question: Why, exactly, is it that gd even has >> that volatile qualifier in th

Re: [PATCH 0/4] list.h/treewide: get rid of no-op prefetch()

On Sun, May 25, 2025 at 10:07:56PM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > On Thu, May 22 2025, Tom Rini wrote: > > > On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 02:12:42PM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > > > >> While looking through list.h, I saw that the regular list_* helpers > >> (and one of the hlist_* ones) still co

Re: [PATCH 0/4] list.h/treewide: get rid of no-op prefetch()

On Thu, May 22 2025, Tom Rini wrote: > On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 02:12:42PM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > >> While looking through list.h, I saw that the regular list_* helpers >> (and one of the hlist_* ones) still contain the prefetch() that was >> removed in linux 14 years ago. It doesn't do

Re: [PATCH 0/4] list.h/treewide: get rid of no-op prefetch()

On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 02:12:42PM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > While looking through list.h, I saw that the regular list_* helpers > (and one of the hlist_* ones) still contain the prefetch() that was > removed in linux 14 years ago. It doesn't do anything, but makes the > macros harder to re

Re: [PATCH 0/4] list.h/treewide: get rid of no-op prefetch()

On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 02:12:42PM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > While looking through list.h, I saw that the regular list_* helpers > (and one of the hlist_* ones) still contain the prefetch() that was > removed in linux 14 years ago. It doesn't do anything, but makes the > macros harder to re

[PATCH 0/4] list.h/treewide: get rid of no-op prefetch()

While looking through list.h, I saw that the regular list_* helpers (and one of the hlist_* ones) still contain the prefetch() that was removed in linux 14 years ago. It doesn't do anything, but makes the macros harder to read, so get rid of it, and the fallback, no-op definition that they relied o