The patch titled Subject: mutex: use spin_[un]lock instead of arch_spin_[un]lock has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was mutex-use-spin_lock-instead-of-arch_spin_lock.patch This patch was dropped because it was nacked ------------------------------------------------------ From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: mutex: use spin_[un]lock instead of arch_spin_[un]lock Use spin_[un]lock instead of arch_spin_[un]lock in mutex-debug.h so that we can collect the lock statistics of spin_lock_mutex from /proc/lock_stat. Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- index 0799fd3..556c0bc 100644 Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- kernel/mutex-debug.h | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff -puN kernel/mutex-debug.h~mutex-use-spin_lock-instead-of-arch_spin_lock kernel/mutex-debug.h --- a/kernel/mutex-debug.h~mutex-use-spin_lock-instead-of-arch_spin_lock +++ a/kernel/mutex-debug.h @@ -43,13 +43,13 @@ static inline void mutex_clear_owner(str \ DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(in_interrupt()); \ local_irq_save(flags); \ - arch_spin_lock(&(lock)->rlock.raw_lock);\ + spin_lock(lock); \ DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(l->magic != l); \ } while (0) #define spin_unlock_mutex(lock, flags) \ do { \ - arch_spin_unlock(&(lock)->rlock.raw_lock); \ + spin_unlock(lock); \ local_irq_restore(flags); \ preempt_check_resched(); \ } while (0) _ Patches currently in -mm which might be from yuanhan.liu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx are mm-fix-wrong-comments-about-anon_vma-lock.patch linux-next.patch fs-execc-make-bprm_mm_init-static.patch mutex-use-spin_lock-instead-of-arch_spin_lock-fix.patch -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe mm-commits" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html