Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1520225 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH -v4 1/8] locking/drm: Kill mutex trickery

Started byIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
First post2016-11-12 12:00 +0100
Last post2016-11-14 15:30 +0100
Articles 3 — 2 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: [PATCH -v4 1/8] locking/drm: Kill mutex trickery Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2016-11-12 12:00 +0100
    Re: [PATCH -v4 1/8] locking/drm: Kill mutex trickery Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-14 15:10 +0100
      Re: [PATCH -v4 1/8] locking/drm: Kill mutex trickery Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2016-11-14 15:30 +0100

#1520225 — Re: [PATCH -v4 1/8] locking/drm: Kill mutex trickery

FromIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Date2016-11-12 12:00 +0100
SubjectRe: [PATCH -v4 1/8] locking/drm: Kill mutex trickery
Message-ID<sCEcp-VK-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 12:22:02PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> 
> > Once all your locking rework is assembled it might be good to have a
> > topic branch I could pull in. Both for testing and to handle conflicts
> > before it goes boom in the merge window ;-) Not necessary ofc, but I
> > think it'd be useful.
> 
> Everything except the trylock_recursive is already in tip/locking/core.
> 
> Ingo, is that all there is in that branch?

It has other bits as well - but I can create a separate topic branch for this, 
which would be c7faee2109f9 plus trylock_recursive().

Could you send a final version of trylock_recursive() patch for me to apply?

Thanks,

	Ingo

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1521678

FromPeter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date2016-11-14 15:10 +0100
Message-ID<sDq7o-81N-35@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1520225
On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 11:58:49AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> Could you send a final version of trylock_recursive() patch for me to apply?

The latest lives here:

 lkml.kernel.org/r/20161109103813.GN3157@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net

But I would really like someone to actually test that before you stick
it in.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1521691

FromIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Date2016-11-14 15:30 +0100
Message-ID<sDqqJ-892-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1521678
* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 11:58:49AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> > Could you send a final version of trylock_recursive() patch for me to apply?
> 
> The latest lives here:
> 
>  lkml.kernel.org/r/20161109103813.GN3157@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net
> 
> But I would really like someone to actually test that before you stick
> it in.

Agreed ...

Thanks,

	Ingo

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web