1. 29 9月, 2017 1 次提交
  2. 20 5月, 2014 1 次提交
  3. 26 4月, 2014 1 次提交
  4. 08 2月, 2014 1 次提交
    • T
      s390: use device_remove_file_self() instead of device_schedule_callback() · 0b60f9ea
      Tejun Heo 提交于
      driver-core now supports synchrnous self-deletion of attributes and
      the asynchrnous removal mechanism is scheduled for removal.  Use it
      instead of device_schedule_callback().
      
      * Conversions in arch/s390/pci/pci_sysfs.c and
        drivers/s390/block/dcssblk.c are straightforward.
      
      * drivers/s390/cio/ccwgroup.c is a bit more tricky because
        ccwgroup_notifier() was (ab)using device_schedule_callback() to
        purely obtain a process context to kick off ungroup operation which
        may block from a notifier callback.
      
        Rename ccwgroup_ungroup_callback() to ccwgroup_ungroup() and make it
        take ccwgroup_device * instead.  The new function is now called
        directly from ccwgroup_ungroup_store().
      
        ccwgroup_notifier() chain is updated to explicitly bounce through
        ccwgroup_device->ungroup_work.  This also removes possible failure
        from memory pressure.
      
      Only compile-tested.
      Signed-off-by: NTejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
      Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
      Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
      Cc: linux390@de.ibm.com
      Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
      Signed-off-by: NGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
      0b60f9ea
  5. 14 1月, 2014 1 次提交
    • G
      Revert "s390: use device_remove_file_self() instead of device_schedule_callback()" · ff483d55
      Greg Kroah-Hartman 提交于
      This reverts commit bdbb0a13.
      
      Tejun writes:
              I'm sorry but can you please revert the whole series?
              get_active() waiting while a node is deactivated has potential
              to lead to deadlock and that deactivate/reactivate interface is
              something fundamentally flawed and that cgroup will have to work
              with the remove_self() like everybody else.  IOW, I think the
              first posting was correct.
      
      Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
      Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
      Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
      Cc: linux390@de.ibm.com
      Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
      Signed-off-by: NGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
      ff483d55
  6. 11 1月, 2014 1 次提交
    • T
      s390: use device_remove_file_self() instead of device_schedule_callback() · bdbb0a13
      Tejun Heo 提交于
      driver-core now supports synchrnous self-deletion of attributes and
      the asynchrnous removal mechanism is scheduled for removal.  Use it
      instead of device_schedule_callback().
      
      * Conversions in arch/s390/pci/pci_sysfs.c and
        drivers/s390/block/dcssblk.c are straightforward.
      
      * drivers/s390/cio/ccwgroup.c is a bit more tricky because
        ccwgroup_notifier() was (ab)using device_schedule_callback() to
        purely obtain a process context to kick off ungroup operation which
        may block from a notifier callback.
      
        Rename ccwgroup_ungroup_callback() to ccwgroup_ungroup() and make it
        take ccwgroup_device * instead.  The new function is now called
        directly from ccwgroup_ungroup_store().
      
        ccwgroup_notifier() chain is updated to explicitly bounce through
        ccwgroup_device->ungroup_work.  This also removes possible failure
        from memory pressure.
      
      Only compile-tested.
      Signed-off-by: NTejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
      Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
      Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
      Cc: linux390@de.ibm.com
      Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
      Signed-off-by: NGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
      bdbb0a13
  7. 23 11月, 2012 1 次提交
  8. 05 6月, 2012 1 次提交
  9. 16 5月, 2012 3 次提交
  10. 23 3月, 2011 1 次提交
  11. 16 6月, 2009 1 次提交
  12. 02 8月, 2008 1 次提交
  13. 29 4月, 2008 1 次提交
  14. 05 2月, 2008 1 次提交
  15. 12 10月, 2007 1 次提交
  16. 27 4月, 2007 1 次提交
  17. 17 4月, 2005 1 次提交
    • L
      Linux-2.6.12-rc2 · 1da177e4
      Linus Torvalds 提交于
      Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
      even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
      archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
      3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
      git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
      infrastructure for it.
      
      Let it rip!
      1da177e4