Re: linux-next oops in __lock_acquire for process_one_work
From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Wed May 09 2012 - 05:25:38 EST
* Hugh Dickins <hughd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2012, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 11:11 -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > > Please send me the version of patch you'd like to put in
> > > (lest I make it up myself and you don't like the result).
> > something like so?
> More like the one below: I'm not alone in preferring a comma
> between args!
> And you're not a believer in checkpatch.pl, I see: I've removed trailing
> spaces; but left the 85-col line, that's not a fight I'll have with you.
I suspect we could break up the prototype like this:
static inline void
lockdep_copy_map(struct lockdep_map *to, struct lockdep_map *from)
> I'll set it going when I get home later - thanks.
Do we still need an explanation about why it's needed and why it
makes a difference?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/