On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 17:15:49 -0700 Guenter Roeck <li...@roeck-us.net> wrote:
> Error on my part - I thought lower numbers would > have higher priority, but after looking into the code again that > is wrong. You shouldn't have needed to look into the code :( Maybe a documentation patch for notifier_block.priority for the next person? > To avoid making things too complicated, maybe it would make sense to > specify guidelines for notifier priorities, such as > 0 - restart notifier of last resort, with least reset capabilities > 128 - default; use if no other notifier is expected to be available > and/or if restart functionality is acceptable > 255 - highest priority notifier which _must_ be used > > Would that make sense and be acceptable ? In this context, I would then > set the notifier priorities for the callers in the patch set to 128. Yep, that sounds nice. It's unlikely to see a lot of use, but at least we showed we thought about it ;) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
