[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161114140446.GD3142@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2016 15:04:46 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Waiman Long <waiman.long@....com>,
Jason Low <jason.low2@....com>,
Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Imre Deak <imre.deak@...el.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Terry Rudd <terry.rudd@....com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ibm.com>,
Jason Low <jason.low2@...com>,
Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v4 1/8] locking/drm: Kill mutex trickery
On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 11:58:49AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Could you send a final version of trylock_recursive() patch for me to apply?
The latest lives here:
lkml.kernel.org/r/20161109103813.GN3157@...ns.programming.kicks-ass.net
But I would really like someone to actually test that before you stick
it in.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists