On Fri, 2018-03-16 at 21:18 +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > The goal here is to make the memory allocation in get_irq_table() not > with disabled interrupts and having as little raw_spin_lock as > possible > while having them if the caller is also holding one (like desc->lock > during IRQ-affinity changes). > I reverted one patch one patch in the iommu while rebasing since it > make job easier.
If the goal is to have "as little raw_spin_lock as possible" -- and presumably also to avoid unnecessary complexity -- wouldn't it be better to leave my patch in, and drop patches 4 and 9? -Scott _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu