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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fbdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
