From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/33] vt: More locking checks Date: Mon, 27 May 2019 09:22:14 +0200 Message-ID: <20190527072214.GB7997@kroah.com> References: <20190524085354.27411-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> <20190524085354.27411-5-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> <20190527070858.GJ21222@phenom.ffwll.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190527070858.GJ21222@phenom.ffwll.local> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: LKML , Intel Graphics Development , DRI Development , Daniel Vetter , Nicolas Pitre , Martin Hostettler , Adam Borowski , Mikulas Patocka List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 09:08:58AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 10:53:25AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > I honestly have no idea what the subtle differences between > > con_is_visible, con_is_fg (internal to vt.c) and con_is_bound are. But > > it looks like both vc->vc_display_fg and con_driver_map are protected > > by the console_lock, so probably better if we hold that when checking > > this. > > > > To do that I had to deinline the con_is_visible function. > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman > > Cc: Nicolas Pitre > > Cc: Martin Hostettler > > Cc: Adam Borowski > > Cc: Daniel Vetter > > Cc: Mikulas Patocka > > Hi Greg, > > Do you want to merge this through your console tree or ack for merging > through drm/fbdev? It's part of a bigger series, and I'd like to have more > testing with this in our trees, but also ok to merge stand-alone if you > prefer that. It's just locking checks and some docs. > > Same for the preceeding patch in this series here. For all of these, please take them through your tree(s): Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman