> From: Jake Oshins <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2022 12:21 PM
> ...
> Thanks everybody for responding to my questions.
>
> Bjorn, from your response, it sounds like this change is safe until some possible
> future which new functionality is introduced for rebalancing resources.
>
> Dexuan, I don't have any further objection to the patch.
>
> -- Jake Oshins
Thank all for the informative discussion!!
@Bjorn, Lorenzo: can this patch go through the hyperv tree?
I see some recent pci-hyperv commits in the hyperv tree:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/hyperv/linux.git
On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 01:11:29AM +0000, Dexuan Cui wrote:
> > From: Jake Oshins <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2022 12:21 PM
> > ...
> > Thanks everybody for responding to my questions.
> >
> > Bjorn, from your response, it sounds like this change is safe until some possible
> > future which new functionality is introduced for rebalancing resources.
> >
> > Dexuan, I don't have any further objection to the patch.
> >
> > -- Jake Oshins
>
> Thank all for the informative discussion!!
>
> @Bjorn, Lorenzo: can this patch go through the hyperv tree?
> I see some recent pci-hyperv commits in the hyperv tree:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/hyperv/linux.git
For this patch it should be fine as long as it does not become a rule,
we still want to be in the review loop for PCI hyper-V changes.
I will comment and ACK shortly.
Lorenzo