* Nick Piggin <[email protected]> wrote: > Anyway, if this can make its way to the x86 tree, I think it will get > pulled into -mm (?) and get some exposure... ok, we can certainly try it there. Your code is really nifty. Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [patch 1/4] x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 1/4] x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks
- References:
- [patch 0/4] ticket spinlocks for x86
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- [patch 1/4] x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 1/4] x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks
- From: Gregory Haskins <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 1/4] x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 1/4] x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks
- From: Rik van Riel <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 1/4] x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 1/4] x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- [patch 0/4] ticket spinlocks for x86
- Prev by Date: [PATCH 1/3]: tty - fix network driver interactions with TCGET/SET calls
- Next by Date: Re: [patch] PID namespace design bug, workaround
- Previous by thread: Re: [patch 1/4] x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks
- Next by thread: Re: [patch 1/4] x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks
- Index(es):
 |