Re: [PATCH][next] loop: Fix missing max_active argument in alloc_workqueue call

[Jens Axboe]

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.

-- 
Jens Axboe