On 02.02.22 11:45, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 02.02.2022 10:38, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>> On 02.02.22 11:05, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 02.02.2022 09:44, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Feb 01, 2022 at 06:25:07PM +0200, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>>>>> From: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushche...@epam.com>
>>> Oleksandr, can you please clarify authorship here? The rule of thumb is
>>> that From: matches ...
>>>
>>>>> Shrink critical section in vpci_{read/write} as racing calls to
>>>>> vpci_{read,write}_hw() shouldn't be a problem. Those are just wrappers
>>>>> around pci_conf_{read,write} functions, and the required locking (in
>>>>> case of using the IO ports) is already taken care in 
>>>>> pci_conf_{read,write}.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note, that we anyways split 64bit writes into two 32bit ones
>>>>> without taking the lock for the whole duration of the access, so it is
>>>>> possible to see a partially updated state as a result of a 64bit write:
>>>>> the PCI(e) specification don't seem to specify whether the ECAM is allowed
>>>>> to split memory transactions into multiple Configuration Requests and
>>>>> whether those could then interleave with requests from a different CPU.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger....@citrix.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushche...@epam.com>
>>> ... the first S-o-b, as these are expected to be in chronological
>>> order.
>> Well, I was not sure here: the idea and the original code belongs
>> to Roger and it was a part of a dedicated other patch. So, technically,
>> this patch didn't exist before and Roger hasn't created it (the patch).
>> So, this is why I'm in doubt here: should I change the authorship
>> to Roger's? I had no means to offend anyone here nor I pretend
>> for the authorship in any form.
> My personal view on it is that if you've broken this out of a larger
> patch coming from Roger, then he should be named as the author.
Agree, will change.
Roger, I am sorry I didn't do it from the start
> Jan
>
Thank you,
Oleksandr

Reply via email to