From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:6160 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751008Ab3DRVCG (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 18 Apr 2013 17:02:06 -0400
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 23:03:06 +0300
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@gmail.com>
Cc: Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@mellanox.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Roland Dreier <roland@kernel.org>,
	netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, Yan Burman <yanb@mellanox.com>,
	Jack Morgenstein <jackm@dev.mellanox.co.il>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH repost for-3.9] pci: avoid work_on_cpu for nested SRIOV
 probes
Message-ID: <20130418200306.GA22435@redhat.com>
References: <20130411191717.GB25515@redhat.com>
 <20130411192005.GN17641@mtj.dyndns.org>
 <20130411203053.GC25515@redhat.com>
 <20130411204104.GC11956@mtj.dyndns.org>
 <516AA80F.7040505@mellanox.com>
 <20130414134339.GA3050@htj.dyndns.org>
 <20130418083347.GA16526@redhat.com>
 <517007F0.4060000@mellanox.com>
 <20130418135458.GC20862@redhat.com>
 <CAJZOPZLuT7jcUJi_EEQ1_fgVCuFHk1Xzbb6kQtPSS4LfL=ArVg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <CAJZOPZLuT7jcUJi_EEQ1_fgVCuFHk1Xzbb6kQtPSS4LfL=ArVg@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-pci.vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 09:41:31PM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> [...]
> > Tejun, what do you say my patch is used for 3.9, and we can revisit for 3.10.
> > The release is almost here. If yes please send your Ack.
> 
> Michael,
> 
> I assume you mean pull to 3.9 both Tejun's and your patch, correct? I
> wasn't sure what does this really buys us... we got read from the
> false-positive lockdep warning which takes place during nested probe
> and got another lockdep warning during the probe of Interrupt
> controller
> 
> Or.

No I mean my original patch.