Date:   Sat, 20 Nov 2021 16:38:51 +0100
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To:     Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] locking/rwlocks: introduce write_lock_nested
Message-ID: <20211120153851.bhxg6xclqagovqiy@linutronix.de>
References: <20211115185909.3949505-1-minchan@kernel.org>
 <20211115185909.3949505-8-minchan@kernel.org>
 <20211119103516.24uhxrkdcy4vq25k@linutronix.de>
 <YZfrMTAXV56HFWJY@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YZfrMTAXV56HFWJY@google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On 2021-11-19 10:21:37 [-0800], Minchan Kim wrote:
> > #define rt_write_lock_nested(lock, subclass)     rt_write_lock(((void)(subclass), (lock)))
> 
> Guess you meant #define write_lock_nested.

indeed, yes.

> I should have Cced you. Thanks for the catch.
> If it's fine, Andrew, could you fold it?

You are welcome. I tested the series in my RT queue and it works.

Acked-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>

> Thank you.

Sebastian