On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 3:52 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Michael Paquier > <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 2:24 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 4:13 AM, Michael Paquier >>>> <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> I would just write "To >>>>> avoid calling CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS which can happen when releasing a >>>>> LWLock" and be done with it. There is no point to list a full function >>>>> dependency list, which could change in the future with static routines >>>>> of lwlock.c. >>> >>> Agreed. Updated the comment. >> >> Robert actually liked adding the complete routine list. Let's see what >> Fujii-san thinks at the end, there is still some time until the next >> round of minor releases. > > What I think is the patch I attached. Thought?
That's OK for me. Thanks. -- Michael
