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? Colin
