Hi Wolfram, On Fri, Jun 09, 2023 at 05:32:42PM +0200, wsa@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > I think the patch is correct and I will ack it: > > > > Acked-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > I think, though, that this needs a proper fix and testing, in > > order to cover all the possible combinations. The scenario you > > highlighted is indeed one, but not only, potential situation that > > could arise. > > > > Can I just ask you to write a bit more in the comment to > > highlight the possible failure? > > I tend to apply it to for-current because it improves the situation. > Further improvements could be made incrementally? D'accord everyone? > OK with that! Thanks, Andi
