On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 11:46:44PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 08:58:52PM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > > > I think this needs a WARN_ON thrown in to enforece the calling context. > > > > I considered adding a might_sleep() but upon review with Bart, he noted > > that this function already has a mutex_lock(), and if you look under the > > hood of mutex_lock(), it has a might_sleep() at the very top. The > > warning then is implicit. > > It might just be a personal preference, but I think the documentation > value of a WARN_ON_ONCE or might_sleep with a comment at the top of > the function is much higher than a blurb in a long kerneldoc text and > a later mutex_lock. Well I'm a fan of making this explicit, so sure will just sprinkle a might_sleep(), even though we have a mutex_lock(). Luis
