On 02/21/2017 07:42 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 02/21/2017 11:59 AM, Jon Derrick wrote:
>> v3->v4:
>> Passes in 'lock_held' into opal_lock_unlock() so we don't need to
>> mutex_trylock(). I wasn't totally confident in that approach anyways.
>>
>> v2->v3:
>> Squashed 5/5 into 4/5
>> Changed opal_st
On 02/21/2017 11:59 AM, Jon Derrick wrote:
> v3->v4:
> Passes in 'lock_held' into opal_lock_unlock() so we don't need to
> mutex_trylock(). I wasn't totally confident in that approach anyways.
>
> v2->v3:
> Squashed 5/5 into 4/5
> Changed opal_step structs back to const
> Cleaned up opal_lock_unlo
v3->v4:
Passes in 'lock_held' into opal_lock_unlock() so we don't need to
mutex_trylock(). I wasn't totally confident in that approach anyways.
v2->v3:
Squashed 5/5 into 4/5
Changed opal_step structs back to const
Cleaned up opal_lock_unlock
v1->v2:
Moved misplaced code from 5/5 to 4/5
The first