On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 03:05:29PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 3:08 AM, Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 08:16:09AM -0700, Kees Cook 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: Patrik Jakobsson <[email protected]> > >> Cc: David Airlie <[email protected]> > >> Cc: [email protected] > >> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]> > > > > Do you expect drm folks to apply this, or is this part of a larger > > refactoring? > > If the drm tree includes -rc3, you can carry these. If you don't want > to carry these and want the timer tree to carry them, we can do that > too.
Applied to drm-misc-next for 4.16 (we're way past freeze for 4.15 already). Thanks, Daniel > > > A notch more context in the commit message would help ... > > Sorry about that, my added context for this go lost in later conversion > patches. > > -Kees > > -- > Kees Cook > Pixel Security > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch
