On 2018-03-28 15:05:41 [+0000], Bart Van Assche wrote: > The names of the two functions touched by patch 1/2 start with a double > underscore. That by itself is already a hint that these should be called with > a lock held (I know that this is not a universal convention in the Linux > kernel). I'm fine either way - either with patch 1/2 as posted or patch 1/2 > with the above comment added. Okay. In that case let me update 1/2. But 2/2 with the comment as Steven suggested is still a no no for you? > Bart. Sebastian
