From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CE2FC04A6B for ; Mon, 6 May 2019 22:39:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F9812082F for ; Mon, 6 May 2019 22:39:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1557182367; bh=JQoMa7RCDkHbE8FXdHuB1lKZCoVy/Vrl4mbSx9qoV6I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=MV85JQlLiZEMtr1DyUaeyhVlsVbVUvhqJ81E29m9CCssfuDCGy7nsOfLd42tWzvnJ 4FD/Mun7PMHhPoEZ+Gzxlr9IebPtONlfVh0pdoj+EQN6DyK3PfMm34OAD9luCXF2v+ Biaefk2U7XRT6ex9tEW1Ie6WWgkIr3uif/tVYT2g= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726476AbfEFWjZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 May 2019 18:39:25 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f66.google.com ([209.85.221.66]:40908 "EHLO mail-wr1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726218AbfEFWjZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 May 2019 18:39:25 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f66.google.com with SMTP id h4so115680wre.7 for ; Mon, 06 May 2019 15:39:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Ka4yFFMac0PKY8hCqrqpr9qdj7uVcx8s9jTtvQbtmvk=; b=ptyrulA9+0duqyRvzyJjqKTxB+iSavktL9QPAPulrRlmj1JX3gSRXD6U0jxL8XLuXj BR+yMnjJPjckPI/r7S/J+sx6fCeul892FYVE3lBOCzaNu/jafLxhyE6EYCjb8Gx7d5cT Z+COa5m6TXiwV6I9WIWBeS1RYMYBloEvGglgDfHcfgHMXkwz/BlU58YiumK96GA0pBeJ fAG9UBLM/5QUZolP4J6i3lAWXO5nGLeY7BjjSFaXY6sJj60NOtD9JFHCrpuW02OOp6A9 bTeKU6U+G/nPb/RVbAmt124ndHM8IJ3xpjSUjHWOcDWiMz+pwLdvWZ/zBhp4k06Lmixh +DCg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Ka4yFFMac0PKY8hCqrqpr9qdj7uVcx8s9jTtvQbtmvk=; b=B4q5y9BmJTqaUw8ZpxWAx1zZqOcaKNcxZNhayumKz7eb0BnGVt+B5ZEVqldrqfIDST WobnakFU5zrBff3p6PGyDeoYKlMS6u9C5O7B+AoGl1IadLok430oDnHFSyl2sHKTPsmR HGm2HpvmuVLHDDcb8zjH3WIhoX3nmoF9mHE2wvhd7/uMsh3kpsdEN4DUJDyIfq+TAR7Z wN9OPQI5Jdd9LNt9KAlKwosq0/7ZD12NjSkLplw2IzeXZwhdunpV73JxVM52batuuyQC F+NAH7IMnIVo2kwTmuWzCMWCROXB/JeNfE1287iY3fQYNO0p+42mbmQ/UR2n12FBL0XQ GDwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVt6F2V00nWVFwPmZ9ZT2DVs8mGMI7yXqJ6psFDp6CfRdZF8hKz bvUH2pWs/Yla7BQPKaPBNro= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzWHG43MauN9xGbJvJZ4RUx2zBGw12t182kzLsgEFKpzi+8oz0LwMu32l9RE8z2t5rFS7zp+w== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:67cb:: with SMTP id n11mr19788029wrw.3.1557182363991; Mon, 06 May 2019 15:39:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmail.com (2E8B0CD5.catv.pool.telekom.hu. [46.139.12.213]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k67sm16977088wmb.34.2019.05.06.15.39.22 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 06 May 2019 15:39:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 7 May 2019 00:39:20 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Waiman Long , Linux List Kernel Mailing , Peter Zijlstra , Will Deacon , Thomas Gleixner , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] locking changes for v5.2 Message-ID: <20190506223920.GA21667@gmail.com> References: <20190506085014.GA130963@gmail.com> <20190506194339.GA20938@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 12:43 PM Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > Sure - how close is this to a straight: > > > > git revert 70800c3c0cc5 > > It's not really a revert. The code is different (and better) from the > straight revert, but perhaps equally importantly it also ends up with a > big comment about what's going on that made the original commit wrong. > > So I'd suggest just taking the patch as-is, and not calling it a > revert. It may revert to the original _model_ of wakup list traversal, > but it does so differently enough that the patch itself is not a > revert. Ok, will do this tomorrow! Thanks, Ingo