[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180530092614.wch377xtjrjgovnl@linutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 11:26:14 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Introduce atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave()
On 2018-05-23 15:02:41 [+0200], Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 1,5-6:
> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
I sucked them into my try tree an noticed this off by one, I applied the
tags to 1,4-5:
*┬─>[PATCH 1/5] spinlock: atomic_dec_and_lock: Add an irqsave variant
├─>[PATCH 2/5] mm/backing-dev: Use irqsave variant of atomic_dec_and_lock()
├─>[PATCH 3/5] kernel/user: Use irqsave variant of atomic_dec_and_lock()
*├─>[PATCH 4/5] drivers/md/raid5: Use irqsave variant of atomic_dec_and_lock()
*├─>[PATCH 5/5] drivers/md/raid5: Do not disable irq on release_inactive_stripe_list() call
as we talked about it.
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists