On 3/18/21 2:24 PM, Colin Ian King wrote: > On 18/03/2021 20:12, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 3/18/21 9:16 AM, Colin King wrote: >>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> The 3rd argument to alloc_workqueue should be the max_active count, >>> however currently it is the lo->lo_number that is intended for the >>> loop%d number. Fix this by adding in the missing max_active count. >> >> Dan, please fold this (or something similar) in when you're redoing the >> series. >> > Appreciate this fix being picked up. Are we going to lose the SoB? If it's being redone, would be silly to have that error in there. Do we have a tag that's appropriate for this? I often wonder when I'm folding in a fix. Ala Fixes-by: or something like that. -- Jens Axboe
