[PATCH 1/2] Optimize generic spinlock code and use C11 like atomic macros.

[Zack Weinberg]

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 8:05 AM, Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> wrote:
> On Apr 11 2017, Stefan Liebler <stli@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> It happened in the case of __HAVE_64B_ATOMICS.
>
> We shouldn't follow a bad example.

How about you propose a patch to fix __HAVE_64B_ATOMICS the way you
think it should be, Andreas, since you're making such a fuss about
this?

zw