On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:50 PM, David Gibson
wrote:
> On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 04:43:51AM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 05/02/2017 12:40 AM, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> > > On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 10:55 PM, Daniel Henrique Barboza
> > > mailto:danie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>>
> > >
On 05/04/2017 04:24 AM, David Gibson wrote:
On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 05:33:54PM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
Update: I have talked with Michael Roth about the spapr_release_lmb
callback, the flow
of the LMB releases and so on. He clarified to me that it is not possible to
get rid of
th
On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 05:33:54PM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
> Update: I have talked with Michael Roth about the spapr_release_lmb
> callback, the flow
> of the LMB releases and so on. He clarified to me that it is not possible to
> get rid of
> the callback and put its code in the spap
On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 04:43:51AM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
>
>
> On 05/02/2017 12:40 AM, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 10:55 PM, Daniel Henrique Barboza
> > mailto:danie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Following up the previous detach_cb change, th
Update: I have talked with Michael Roth about the spapr_release_lmb
callback, the flow
of the LMB releases and so on. He clarified to me that it is not
possible to get rid of
the callback and put its code in the spapr_del_lmbs function.
The reason is that the callback is being executed by the g
On 05/03/2017 12:26 AM, Bharata B Rao wrote:
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Daniel Henrique Barboza
mailto:danie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>> wrote:
On 05/02/2017 12:40 AM, Bharata B Rao wrote:
On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 10:55 PM, Daniel Henrique Barboza
mailto:danie...@linux.vnet.ibm
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Daniel Henrique Barboza <
danie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 05/02/2017 12:40 AM, Bharata B Rao wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 10:55 PM, Daniel Henrique Barboza <
> danie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> Following up the previous detach_cb change, th
On 05/02/2017 12:40 AM, Bharata B Rao wrote:
On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 10:55 PM, Daniel Henrique Barboza
mailto:danie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>> wrote:
Following up the previous detach_cb change, this patch removes the
detach_cb_opaque entirely from the code.
The reason is that the dr
