[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZZPcpVJVfsPk06xk@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2024 10:51:33 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>
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>,
'Linus Torvalds' <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"'virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org'" <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
'Zeng Heng' <zengheng4@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH next v2 1/5] locking/osq_lock: Defer clearing
node->locked until the slow osq_lock() path.
Also, please don't put periods into titles:
s/[PATCH next v2 1/5] locking/osq_lock: Defer clearing node->locked until the slow osq_lock() path.
/[PATCH next v2 1/5] locking/osq_lock: Defer clearing node->locked until the slow osq_lock() path
Usually maintainers remove them manually, but there's no reason to be
inconsistent: half of your series had a period. It just unnecessarily
distracts from review.
This rule applies to this series and to all future patches.
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists