On Thu, 2 Nov 2017 16:36:53 -0700 Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 11:38 PM, Martin Schwidefsky > <schwidef...@de.ibm.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 03:27:37 -0700 > > Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> 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: Harald Freudenberger <fre...@de.ibm.com> > >> Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidef...@de.ibm.com> > >> Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carst...@de.ibm.com> > >> Cc: linux-s...@vger.kernel.org > >> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> > >> --- > >> drivers/s390/crypto/ap_bus.c | 10 +++++----- > >> drivers/s390/crypto/ap_bus.h | 2 +- > >> drivers/s390/crypto/ap_queue.c | 2 +- > >> 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > Parked for the second part of the s390 updates for the next merge window. > > Thanks. > > Thanks for getting these staged. I just wanted to check with you, > since I don't see these in -next anywhere yet: > > s390: qdio: Convert timers to use timer_setup() > s390/sclp: Convert timers to use timer_setup() > s390/cio: Convert timers to use timer_setup() > s390/scsi: Convert timers to use timer_setup() > s390/ap_bus: Convert timers to use timer_setup() > > Are all of these expected to land for -rc1? (Would it help to carry > them in the timer tree?) I've got tree-wide changes ready to go once > all these conversions have landed. These patches are parked on a private branches. The features branch on s390/linux is the one that is used for -next AND for the upstream merge. And since I do not want to rebase that branch the timer_setup patches are not in -next as well. Four of you patches are safe with me, the s390/scsi patch is in Steffens patch queue. All good I would say. -- blue skies, Martin. "Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.
