Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] vfio-ccw: Prevent quiesce function going into an infinite loop

[Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>]

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 11:18:19 -0400
Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 04/17/2019 11:13 AM, Halil Pasic wrote:
> >>> Otherwise, looks good to me. Will queue when I get some ack/r-b.
> >>>
> >> I like it, but I feel weird giving an r-b to something I suggested:
> >>
> >> Acked-by: Eric Farman<farman@linux.ibm.com>
> >>
> > I think r-b is fine. You did verify both the design and the
> > implementation I guess. So I don't see why not.
> > 
> > How urgent is this. I could give this some love till the end of the
> > week. Should I @Connie,@Farhan?
> 
> Having more people review it is always a good thing :)
> 

Hi Farhan,

I was starring at this code for about an hour if not more and could not
figure out the intentions/ideas behind it. That is not a fault of your
patch, but I can't say that I understand neither the before nor the
after.

What understand this patch basically does is make us call
cio_disable_subchannel() more often. That is what you point out in your
commit message as well. But I fail to see how does this achieve what the
summary line promises:  'Prevent quiesce function going into an infinite
loop'.

Sorry, I can't r-b this. Maybe you can help me gain an understanding of
this code offline.

I guess, the approval of the people who actually understand what it is
going on (i.e. Connie and Eric) will have to suffice.

Regards,
Halil