On Monday 18 April 2016 02:48 AM, Matt Fleming wrote: > On Fri, 15 Apr, at 08:38:37AM, Julia Lawall wrote: >> I looked at it a bit with Vaishali. I wonder if it would be possible at >> least to have only one flag? Then one wouldn't have to maintain the >> subtle relationship between atomic and duplicates. I'm not sure that it >> would help Coccinelle, but at least one could see more quickly that >> Coccinelle is giving a false positive. > Yeah, that would be a good idea. > > How about we drop the @atomic parameter and simply use @duplicates to > figure out whether to perform duplicate detection, which we should > note in the comment of efivar_init() cannot be performed atomically. > Bonus points if someone can clean up the code flow too. I think using only @duplicates would be helpful to make code more clear. I can actually clean up the code flow but it may take some time for me to send the patches as I already have some other work with me.
Do you want to go for it? Or for now we can just go for dropping @atomic parameter. > Otherwise, efivar_init() is done while holding a spinlock. -- Vaishali
