On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Frans Klaver <fransklaver@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven > <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:45 AM, AbdAllah-MEZITI >> <abdallah.meziti.pro@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> This patch >>> - will always take the lock >> >> Why? >> >> "The current code only takes the lock if multiple instances are in use. >> This is error-prone, and confuses static analyzers. >> As taking the lock in case of a single instance is harmful and cheap, >> change the code to always take the lock." > > I would argue that it's not harmful, lest people get confused about Sorry, I meant "harmless". I should start caring as much for commit messages I write for other people as for those I write for myself ;-) > it. And I agree that this explanation is much more useful than just > mentioning the warnings that you saw. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel