Hi, On 01/07/19 07:51, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 10:27:31AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > IIRC TJ figured it wasn't strictly required to fix the lock invertion at > > that time and they sorted it differently. If I (re)read the thread > > correctly the other day, he didn't have fundamental objections against > > it, but wanted the simpler fix. > > Yeah I've got no objections to the change itself, it just wasn't > needed at the time. We've had multiple issues there tho, so please > keep an eye open after the changes get merged. Should I take this as an indication that you had a look at the set and (apart from Peter's comments) you are OK with them? If that's the case I will send a v9 out soon. Otherwise I'd kindly ask you to please have a look. Thanks! Juri
