On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 09:10:55AM -0500, Chuck Zmudzinski wrote: > Well, our messages almost collided! I just proposed a v7 that adds > a check to prevent the extra processing for cases when machine is > not xenfv and the slot does not need to be cleared because it was > never reserved. The proposed v7 would not change the behavior of the > patch at all but it would avoid some unnecessary processing. Do you > want me to submit that v7?
Well, preventing an simple assignment and a message from getting logged isn't going to get us far. On the other end, the message "using slot 2" when we don't even if slot 2 is actually going to be used could be confusing, so I guess preventing that message from been logged could be useful indeed. So your proposed v7 would be fine. Cheers, -- Anthony PERARD
