Merge branch 'rhashtable-bit-locking-m68k'
NeilBrown says: ==================== Fix rhashtable bit-locking for m68k As reported by Guenter Roeck, the new rhashtable bit-locking doesn't work on m68k as it only requires 2-byte alignment, so BIT(1) is addresses is not unused. We current use BIT(0) to identify a NULLS marker, but that is only needed in ->next pointers. The bucket head does not need a NULLS marker, so the lsb there can be used for locking. the first 4 patches make some small improvements and re-arrange some code. The final patch converts to using only BIT(0) for these two different special purposes. I had previously suggested dropping the series until I fix it. Given that this was fairly easy, I retract that I think it best simply to add these patches to fix the code. ==================== Tested-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Showing
This diff is collapsed.
Please register or sign in to comment