[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