[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAF=yD-JAZfEG5JoNEQn60gnucJB1gsrFeT38DieG12NQb9DFnQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 16:25:16 -0400
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/static_key: always define static_branch_deferred_inc
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 3:59 PM Jakub Kicinski
<jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 15:44:09 -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
> >
> > This interface is currently only defined if CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL. Make it
> > available also when jump labels are disabled.
> >
> > Fixes: ad282a8117d50 ("locking/static_key: Add support for deferred static branches")
> > Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
> >
> > ---
> >
> > The original patch went into 5.2-rc1, but this interface is not yet
> > used, so this could target either 5.2 or 5.3.
>
> Can we drop the Fixes tag? It's an ugly omission but not a bug fix.
>
> Are you planning to switch clean_acked_data_enable() to the helper once
> merged?
Definitely, can do.
Perhaps it's easiest to send both as a single patch set through net-next, then?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists