[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1348492217.11847.60.camel@twins>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 15:10:17 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] [RESEND] console: implement lockdep support for
console_lock
On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 14:54 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> I've read through the patches and I'm hoping you don't volunteer me to
> pick these up ... ;-)
Worth a try, right? :-)
> But there doesn't seem to be anything that would
> get worse through this lockdep annotation patch, right?
No indeed, your patch looks fine, I just wanted to comment on the
printk() thing.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists