On Fri, 2016-08-12 at 10:14 +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > On 12/08/16 05:07, Dario Faggioli wrote: > > > > Reported-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> > > Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggi...@citrix.com> > It might be nice if we could add an ASSERT() that the appropriate > runqueue was locked, to make sure we don't get caught out again like > this in the future, but I think that would probably require turning > it > into a static inline (which probably wouldn't be so bad anyway). > Mmm... good point.
> But in any case: > > Acked-by: George Dunlap <george.dun...@citrix.com> > > Let me know if you want me to check this in as-is or if you think you > might send a follow-up patch adding an ASSERT. > Yes, I'll send a new patch. Regards, Dario -- <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
