Re: [PATCH] s390: Remove obsolete bust_spinlock() implementation

2018-11-26 Thread Martin Schwidefsky
On Fri, 23 Nov 2018 08:02:12 +0100 Heiko Carstens wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 11:17:48AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > > On (11/22/18 15:15), Petr Mladek wrote: > > > The commit cefc8be82403cf ("Consolidate bust_spinlocks()") kept > > > the s390-specific implementation because of the

Re: [PATCH] s390: Remove obsolete bust_spinlock() implementation

2018-11-22 Thread Heiko Carstens
On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 11:17:48AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > On (11/22/18 15:15), Petr Mladek wrote: > > The commit cefc8be82403cf ("Consolidate bust_spinlocks()") kept > > the s390-specific implementation because of the absence of CONFIG_VT. > > In fact, the only difference was calling co

Re: [PATCH] s390: Remove obsolete bust_spinlock() implementation

2018-11-22 Thread Sergey Senozhatsky
On (11/22/18 15:15), Petr Mladek wrote: > The commit cefc8be82403cf ("Consolidate bust_spinlocks()") kept > the s390-specific implementation because of the absence of CONFIG_VT. > In fact, the only difference was calling console_unblank() instead of > unblank_screen(). > > The common implementatio

Re: [PATCH] s390: Remove obsolete bust_spinlock() implementation

2018-11-22 Thread Christoph Hellwig
Please remove the weak attribute from the generic implementation as well now that the last override is gone.

[PATCH] s390: Remove obsolete bust_spinlock() implementation

2018-11-22 Thread Petr Mladek
The commit cefc8be82403cf ("Consolidate bust_spinlocks()") kept the s390-specific implementation because of the absence of CONFIG_VT. In fact, the only difference was calling console_unblank() instead of unblank_screen(). The common implementation in lib/bust_spinlocks.c started to call unblank_sc