On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 12:55:54PM +0300, Maksim.Melnikov wrote: > On 10.04.2025 12:15, Michael Paquier wrote: >> Hmm, yeah. Instead of last, it would be better to put it in second >> place perhaps, for clarity? That would be the same at the end, but we >> would be slightly more consistent with the past logic regarding the >> ordering. Does that look OK to you? > > Yes, from my point of view it looks fine.
Thanks for the double-check. I've played a couple more hours with the startup case, like playing with s_s_names set but uninitialized in shmem while stucking backends, and that seems OK, so applied down to v13. Let's see how it goes.. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
