Re: [PATCH v3] auxdisplay: Remove in_interrupt() usage.

2021-03-10 Thread Miguel Ojeda
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 6:51 PM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > I assumed you are going to apply it but I don't see it in -next as of > today. Is there anything I need to do? Ah, since you said you were posting a patch, I kept this in the waiting list. I will apply the latest one then.

Re: [PATCH v3] auxdisplay: Remove in_interrupt() usage.

2021-03-10 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
On 2021-02-16 21:21:07 [+0100], Miguel Ojeda wrote: … > It is not an order :-) i.e. don't feel pressured that you need to sign > off on the comment change -- I can submit the comment on my own later > on. I assumed you are going to apply it but I don't see it in -next as of today. Is there

Re: [PATCH v3] auxdisplay: Remove in_interrupt() usage.

2021-02-16 Thread Miguel Ojeda
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 7:26 PM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > That should be part of the commit message. You can always rewind to the > commit message that introduce something and check if the commit message > made sense or ignored a detail which made it wrong (or so). No, it shouldn't.

Re: [PATCH v3] auxdisplay: Remove in_interrupt() usage.

2021-02-16 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
On 2021-02-16 13:42:19 [+0100], Miguel Ojeda wrote: > It is not so much about documenting the obvious, but about stating > that 1) the precondition was properly taken into account and that 2) > nothing non-obvious is undocumented. When code is changed later on, it > is much more likely assumptions

Re: [PATCH v3] auxdisplay: Remove in_interrupt() usage.

2021-02-16 Thread Miguel Ojeda
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 11:28 AM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > Could we please avoid documenting the obvious? It is more or less common > knowledge that the write callback (like any other) is preemptible user > context (in which write occurs). The same is true for register/probe >

Re: [PATCH v3] auxdisplay: Remove in_interrupt() usage.

2021-02-16 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
On 2021-02-16 10:32:15 [+0100], Miguel Ojeda wrote: > Hi Sebastian, Hi, > On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 5:50 PM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior > wrote: > > > > charlcd_write() is invoked as a VFS->write() callback and as such it is > > always invoked from preemptible context and may sleep. > > Can we put

Re: [PATCH v3] auxdisplay: Remove in_interrupt() usage.

2021-02-16 Thread Miguel Ojeda
Hi Sebastian, On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 5:50 PM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > charlcd_write() is invoked as a VFS->write() callback and as such it is > always invoked from preemptible context and may sleep. Can we put this sentence as a comment in the code, right before the call to

[PATCH v3] auxdisplay: Remove in_interrupt() usage.

2021-02-13 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
charlcd_write() is invoked as a VFS->write() callback and as such it is always invoked from preemptible context and may sleep. charlcd_puts() is invoked from register/unregister callback which is preemtible. The reboot notifier callback is also invoked from preemptible context. Therefore there