[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160916175842.GD1426@katana>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 19:58:42 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
To: Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Vignesh R <vigneshr@...com>, Yong Li <yong.b.li@...el.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
linux-i2c <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-gpio <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] gpio: fix an incorrect lockdep warning
> > Looks good from my POV, but will wait for Peter to comment.
> >
> > If accepted, I'd think this should go via my I2C tree and I would like
> > to ask Linus to ack patch 4. D'accord, everyone?
>
> Since it is not clear if "Peter" is me or PeterZ (I suspect PeterZ...),
Nope, I meant you :) I really value your input, it especially helps me
on topics like locking, nesting, muxing... etc. Much appreciated, thanks
a lot for doing that!
> I'm just adding that it all looks fine by me as well, just to prevent
> this from being held up by a misunderstanding.
OK. I read this as Acked-by.
> It does unconditionally add a new function to i2c-core that is only
> ever used if lockdep is enabled, but it is tiny and I'm not bothered
> by that memory waste.
Same here. And if it prevents us from false positive lockdep reports, I
am all for fixing it.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists