lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Feb]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] arch: atomic rework
    On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 10:35:44PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
    > On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 06:48:02PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    > > On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 6:44 PM, Linus Torvalds
    > > <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
    > > >
    > > > And conversely, the C11 people can walk away from us too. But if they
    > > > can't make us happy (and by "make us happy", I really mean no stupid
    > > > games on our part) I personally think they'll have a stronger
    > > > standard, and a real use case, and real arguments. I'm assuming they
    > > > want that.
    > >
    > > I should have somebody who proof-reads my emails before I send them out.
    > >
    > > I obviously meant "if they *can* make us happy" (not "can't").
    >
    > Understood. My next step is to take a more detailed look at the piece
    > of the standard that should support RCU. Depending on how that turns
    > out, I might look at other parts of the standard vs. Linux's atomics
    > and memory-ordering needs. Should be interesting. ;-)

    And perhaps a better way to represent the roles is that I am not the
    buyer, but rather the purchasing agent for the -potential- buyer. -You-
    are of course the potential buyer.

    If I were to see myself as the buyer, then I must confess that the
    concerns you implicitly expressed in your prior email would be all too
    well-founded!

    Thanx, Paul



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2014-02-15 08:41    [W:4.166 / U:0.248 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site