On Thu, 12 Aug 2021, Arne Welzel wrote: > Mikulas, > > On Tue, 10 Aug 2021, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > > > Reviewed-by: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > thank you for the review. After looking at the submitted patch again, > seems more proper to use >= as the condition: > > > > + if (unlikely(percpu_counter_read_positive(&cc->n_allocated_pages) > dm_crypt_pages_per_client) && > ^^ > >= > Would it be okay if I resend the patch with this changed and add your > Reviewed-by still? Would also fix some wording in the description and > dedent the perf report output somewhat. > > Thanks, > Arne OK - you can resend the patch with my "Reviewed-by". Mikulas -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
