Re: [PATCH v4 07/12] mm: enable lazy_mmu sections to nest

[David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)]

> > > I don't really mind either way, but I don't see an immediate use for [C]
> > > and [D] - the idea is that the paused section is short and controlled,
> > > not made up of arbitrary calls.
> > If my thinking above is correct, then I've already demonstrated that this is not
> > the case. So I'd be inclined to go with [D] on the basis that it is the most robust.
> >
> > Keeping 2 nesting counts (enable and pause) feels pretty elegant to me and gives
> > the fewest opportunities for surprises.
>
> Agreed, if we're going to allow enable() within a paused section, then
> we might as well allow paused sections to nest too. The use-case is
> clear, so I'm happy to go ahead and make those changes.
>
> David, any thoughts?

I don't mind allowing nesting of pause(), so works for me.

--
Cheers

David