On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 17:10 -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 23:59 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Monday, June 28, 2010, James Bottomley wrote: > > > Since every caller has to squirrel away the returned pointer anyway, > > > they might as well supply the memory area. This fixes a bug in a few of > > > the call sites where the returned pointer was dereferenced without > > > checking it for NULL (which gets returned if the kzalloc failed). > > > > > > I'd like to hear how sound and netdev feels about this: it will add > > > about two more pointers worth of data to struct netdev and struct > > > snd_pcm_substream .. but I think it's worth it. If you're OK, I'll add > > > your acks and send through the pm tree. > > > > > > This also looks to me like an android independent clean up (even though > > > it renders the request_add atomically callable). I also added include > > > guards to include/linux/pm_qos_params.h > > > > > > cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > cc: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxx> > > > > I like all of the patches in this series, thanks a lot for doing this! > > > > I guess it might be worth sending a CC to the LKML next round so that people > > can see [1/3] (I don't expect any objections, but anyway it would be nice). > > I cc'd the latest owners of plist.h ... although Daniel Walker has > apparently since left MontaVista, Thomas Gleixner is still current ... > and he can speak for the RT people, who are the primary plist users. > > I can do another round and cc lkml, I was just hoping this would be the > last revision. I'm still paying attention tho .. I didn't see anything objection worthy in the plist changes.. If you do send another round you might want to add Oleg Nesterov , most of the code was redone by him .. Daniel _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
