On 2016年04月01日 19:47, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
On 04/01/2016 01:26 PM, Mark yao wrote:
On 2016年03月31日 16:08, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
As per the docs, atomic_commit should return -EBUSY "if an asycnhronous
updated is requested and there is an earlier updated pending".
v2: Use the status of the
On 2016年04月01日 19:47, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
On 04/01/2016 01:26 PM, Mark yao wrote:
On 2016年03月31日 16:08, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
As per the docs, atomic_commit should return -EBUSY "if an asycnhronous
updated is requested and there is an earlier updated pending".
v2: Use the status of the
On 04/01/2016 01:26 PM, Mark yao wrote:
> On 2016年03月31日 16:08, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>> As per the docs, atomic_commit should return -EBUSY "if an asycnhronous
>> updated is requested and there is an earlier updated pending".
>>
>> v2: Use the status of the workqueue instead of vop->event, and
On 04/01/2016 01:26 PM, Mark yao wrote:
> On 2016年03月31日 16:08, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>> As per the docs, atomic_commit should return -EBUSY "if an asycnhronous
>> updated is requested and there is an earlier updated pending".
>>
>> v2: Use the status of the workqueue instead of vop->event, and
As per the docs, atomic_commit should return -EBUSY "if an asycnhronous
updated is requested and there is an earlier updated pending".
v2: Use the status of the workqueue instead of vop->event, and don't add
a superfluous wait on the workqueue.
Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso
As per the docs, atomic_commit should return -EBUSY "if an asycnhronous
updated is requested and there is an earlier updated pending".
v2: Use the status of the workqueue instead of vop->event, and don't add
a superfluous wait on the workqueue.
Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso
---
6 matches
Mail list logo