Re: [PATCH 1/2] target: drop spin_lock_assert() + irqs_disabled() combo checks

[Bart Van Assche]

On 03/28/18 08:14, bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On 2018-03-28 15:05:41 [+0000], Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > The names of the two functions touched by patch 1/2 start with a double
> > underscore. That by itself is already a hint that these should be called with
> > a lock held (I know that this is not a universal convention in the Linux
> > kernel). I'm fine either way - either with patch 1/2 as posted or patch 1/2
> > with the above comment added.
>
> Okay. In that case let me update 1/2.
> But 2/2 with the comment as Steven suggested is still a no no for you?

Although I'm not enthusiast about patch 2/2, if others agree with that 
patch I'm fine with that patch being sent upstream.

Thanks,

Bart.