On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 01:32:49PM -0500, Jim Quinlan wrote: [...]
> > I don't think that is the case; the bottom routine, > do_wait_for_common(), decrements the x->done after a completion (which > does an increment). Regardless, I think it is prudent to add the > reinit patch you've provided below. > Ah right, but I will add that. > BTW, one thing I could have done was incorporate the timeout value but > I thought that since this is the "fast" call we shouldn't be timing > out at all. > Agreed, we can add it later. However it is not related to fast call, it is more for protection against failure of delivery of interrupt from the platform or any firmware responsible IMO. > > This electronic communication and the information and any files > > transmitted with it, or attached to it, are confidential and are intended > > solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and > > may contain information that is confidential, legally privileged, > > protected by privacy laws, or otherwise restricted from disclosure to > > anyone else. If you are not the intended recipient or the person > > responsible for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient, you are > > hereby notified that any use, copying, distributing, dissemination, > > forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If > > you received this e-mail in error, please return the e-mail to the sender, > > delete it from your computer, and destroy any printed copy of it. I am assuming this was unintentional and ignoring. If not disregard my response. Otherwise you may need to fix your mail server. -- Regards, Sudeep
