On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 03:05:29PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 3:08 AM, Daniel Vetter <dan...@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 08:16:09AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> In preparation for unconditionally passing the struct timer_list pointer to
> >> all timer callbacks, switch to using the new timer_setup() and from_timer()
> >> to pass the timer pointer explicitly.
> >>
> >> Cc: Patrik Jakobsson <patrik.r.jakobs...@gmail.com>
> >> Cc: David Airlie <airl...@linux.ie>
> >> Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> >> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org>
> >
> > Do you expect drm folks to apply this, or is this part of a larger 
> > refactoring?
> 
> If the drm tree includes -rc3, you can carry these. If you don't want
> to carry these and want the timer tree to carry them, we can do that
> too.

Applied to drm-misc-next for 4.16 (we're way past freeze for 4.15
already).

Thanks, Daniel

> 
> > A notch more context in the commit message would help ...
> 
> Sorry about that, my added context for this go lost in later conversion 
> patches.
> 
> -Kees
> 
> -- 
> Kees Cook
> Pixel Security
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Reply via email to