On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Quoting Chris Wilson (2017-10-25 11:24:19) >> Quoting Chris Wilson (2017-10-24 17:17:09) >> > Quoting Kees Cook (2017-10-24 16:13:44) >> > > In preparation for unconditionally passing the struct timer_list pointer to >> > > all timer callbacks, switch to using the new timer_setup() and from_timer() >> > > to pass the timer pointer explicitly. >> > > >> > > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > > Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> >> > > Cc: David Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxx> >> > > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> >> > > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > > Cc: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> > > Cc: dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> > > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > >> > Thank you for saving me from having to do this myself, >> > Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> I've a small batch of selftests patches queued, so added this one and >> will push to drm-intel-next-queued shortly. > > Oh dear, major faux pas. There is no timer_setup_on_stack yet. Argh. Right, sorry. That's only in -next. Since this is mainly a mechanical change, should I carry this in the timer tree, or wait until the merge window for it to go via i915? -Kees -- Kees Cook Pixel Security _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
