On 15.02.22 13:50, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 15.02.2022 12:45, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >> I'm on your side, I just want to hear that we all agree pcidevs >> needs to be converted into rwlock according with the plan you >> suggested and at least now it seems to be an acceptable solution. > I'd like to express worries though about the conversion of this > recursive lock into an r/w one. Could you please elaborate more on this? I would love not to have 4th approach requested to be implemented ;) > Jan > Thank you in advance, Oleksandr
- [PATCH v2] vpci: introduce per-domain lock to prot... Oleksandr Andrushchenko
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci: introduce per-domain loc... Oleksandr Andrushchenko
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci: introduce per-domain loc... Roger Pau Monné
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci: introduce per-domain... Oleksandr Andrushchenko
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci: introduce per-domain... Oleksandr Andrushchenko
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci: introduce per-do... Roger Pau Monné
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci: introduce pe... Oleksandr Andrushchenko
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci: introdu... Jan Beulich
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci: int... Oleksandr Andrushchenko
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci:... Oleksandr Andrushchenko
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci:... Jan Beulich
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci:... Oleksandr Andrushchenko
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci:... Jan Beulich
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci:... Oleksandr Andrushchenko
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci:... Jan Beulich
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci:... Jan Beulich
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci:... Oleksandr Andrushchenko
- Re: [PATCH v2] vpci:... Jan Beulich