On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 23:33:49 +0200 Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch> wrote: > Like with the equivalent change for gen6+ rps state, this helps in > clarifying the code (and in fixing a few places that have fallen through > the cracks in the locking review). > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch> I don't think this patch is necessary, and doesn't belong in the series. The series was about fixing a locking problem. If you want to submit this as a separate patch, I'd prefer it. If you're really determined to keep it, I'd roll it into the earlier patches that did the rps renaming.
