[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190903073644.GB4500@ziepe.ca>
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 04:36:44 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Wei Wang <wvw@...gle.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] kernel.h: Add non_block_start/end()
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 09:28:23AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > Cleanest would be a new header I guess, together with might_sleep().
> > But moving that is a bit much I think, there's almost 500 callers of
> > that one from a quick git grep
> >
> > > If dropping do while is the only change then I can edit it in..
> > > I think we have the acks now
> >
> > Yeah sounds simplest, thanks.
>
> Hi Jason,
>
> Do you expect me to resend now, or do you plan to do the patchwork
> appeasement when applying? I've seen you merged the other patches
> (thanks!), but not these two here.
Sorry, I didn't get to this before I started travelling, and deferred
it since we were having linux-next related problems with hmm.git. I
hope to do it today.
I will fix it up as promised
Thanks,
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists