DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=pacbell.net;
  h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Received:Date:From:To:Subject:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id;
  b=qexdEjwPGZ65Bjca9wfifd6EPLR6ksOPitbK15554lHORYmfIumA3chAyLQMnYRRP/mYuvAMg5DaARJ1V/wj5jxSqc1mSQjmE0Dh7zOMZOulvCNh8b8rCLuBelI7bL1dT0KtUDi1cX+pJpdKKgyY2/Qf9K5MKsMmz1NIQ5pwrPk=  ;
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:20:42 -0700
From: David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>
To: rpurdie@rpsys.net
Subject: Re: use of preempt_count instead of in_atomic() at leds-gpio.c
Cc: gitster@pobox.com, corbet@lwn.net, stern@rowland.harvard.edu,
       mingo@elte.hu, mb@bu3sch.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       khali@linux-fr.org, hmh@hmh.eng.br, geert@linux-m68k.org,
       akpm@linux-foundation.org
References: <14605.1206452655@vena.lwn.net>
In-Reply-To: <14605.1206452655@vena.lwn.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20080325232042.4EDA7346532@adsl-69-226-248-13.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 706
Lines: 20

I _almost_ hate bringing this lovely flamage back onto $SUBJECT ... but
what's the resolution for the leds-gpio.c issue?  I've not seen a merge
notice for the patch I submitted a week ago now:

	http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=120597839009399&w=2

Just a "leaning..." comment:

	http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=120606104619198&w=2

Seems to me that by now there ought to be resolution on at least
one of the issues brought up on this thread.  :)

- Dave

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/