On 19/02/2016 16:51, Radim Krčmář wrote: > The end result is going to be identical. I had a version that did > something similar and it was pretty tangled as well -- I wanted to > remove useless locks before re-using one for the ioctls. > (We need the protection earlier, because userspace can control notifiers > while PIT is still being initialized. And removing the lock had > dependencies.)
Yeah, I eventually imagined that cleaning up the locks helps with the patch that adds/removes the notifiers dynamically. Then I guess your current ordering of the patches is good! Paolo
