> > Looks good from my POV, but will wait for Peter to comment. > > > > If accepted, I'd think this should go via my I2C tree and I would like > > to ask Linus to ack patch 4. D'accord, everyone? > > Since it is not clear if "Peter" is me or PeterZ (I suspect PeterZ...),
Nope, I meant you :) I really value your input, it especially helps me on topics like locking, nesting, muxing... etc. Much appreciated, thanks a lot for doing that! > I'm just adding that it all looks fine by me as well, just to prevent > this from being held up by a misunderstanding. OK. I read this as Acked-by. > It does unconditionally add a new function to i2c-core that is only > ever used if lockdep is enabled, but it is tiny and I'm not bothered > by that memory waste. Same here. And if it prevents us from false positive lockdep reports, I am all for fixing it.
Description: PGP signature