[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1015f066d717465191c7b7599257f683@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2023 22:39:02 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Linus Torvalds' <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>, "longman@...hat.com"
<longman@...hat.com>, "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>, "boqun.feng@...il.com"
<boqun.feng@...il.com>, "xinhui.pan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com"
<xinhui.pan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, "virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org"
<virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>, Zeng Heng <zengheng4@...wei.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH next 0/5] locking/osq_lock: Optimisations to osq_lock code
From: Linus Torvalds
> Sent: 30 December 2023 19:41
>
> On Fri, 29 Dec 2023 at 12:52, David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com> wrote:
> >
> > David Laight (5):
> > Move the definition of optimistic_spin_node into osf_lock.c
> > Clarify osq_wait_next()
>
> I took these two as preparatory independent patches, with that
> osq_wait_next() clarification split into two.
>
> I also did the renaming that Waiman asked for.
Ok, I'll try to remove them from any respin.
(Or at least put them first!)
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists