Hi Jassi, On 03/16/2016 12:16 AM, Jassi Brar wrote: [...] >> Alright, i will drop this check since it is causing a lot more >> confusion >> > It's confusing because you check ti_msgmgr_queue_get_num_messages() > also in ti_msgmgr_last_tx_done() which doesn't make sense because the > former accounts for messages from other senders also (as you say there > could be multiple senders). True -> I will drop it for now. I will see if the case I was trying to protect is actually possible to be hit in the first place. And if proven to be required, I will introduce it back with a better explanation and the usecase where this is needed. >> that that is worth. we can introduce it when we finally do >> hit an issue eventually with multiple processors trying to transmit on >> the same queue manager. that is not a concern at the very immediate >> time, so we should be good to drop. >> >> please let me know if you are ok with this. >> > I am ok with whatever you assert is needed for your platform. I just > point out what I think are inconsistencies in your assumptions. I'll > pick the next revision however it is. Thanks for your patience and guidance with this series. I have tried to incorporate all the alignment we have had on this thread as part of V3[1] of the series. [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-arm-kernel&m=145817434531691&w=2 -- Regards, Nishanth Menon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
