On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 12:41:22PM -0700, Allen wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

I believe that work queues items are execute single-threaded for a work
queue, so this should be good.  I need to test this, though.  It may be
that an IPMI device can have its own work queue; it may not be important
to run it in bh context.

  Fair point. Could you please let me know once you have had a chance to test
these changes. Meanwhile, I will work on RFC wherein IPMI will have its own
workqueue.

 Thanks for taking time out to review.

After looking and thinking about it a bit, a BH context is still
probably the best for this.

I have tested this patch under load and various scenarios and it seems
to work ok.  So:

Tested-by: Corey Minyard <redacted>
Acked-by: Corey Minyard <redacted>

Or I can take this into my tree.

-corey

 Thank you very much. I think it should be okay for you to carry it into
your tree.

Ok, it's in my for-next tree.  I fixed the directory reference, and I
changed all the comments where you changed "tasklet" to "work" to
instead say "workqueue".

-corey

- Allen