10.12.2021 21:32, Rafael J. Wysocki пишет:
> On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 7:02 PM Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Emit warning if unregister_restart_handler() fails since it never should
>> fail. This will ease further API development by catching mistakes early.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> kernel/reboot.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/reboot.c b/kernel/reboot.c
>> index e6659ae329f1..f0e7b9c13f6b 100644
>> --- a/kernel/reboot.c
>> +++ b/kernel/reboot.c
>> @@ -210,7 +210,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(register_restart_handler);
>> */
>> int unregister_restart_handler(struct notifier_block *nb)
>> {
>> - return atomic_notifier_chain_unregister(&restart_handler_list, nb);
>> + return WARN_ON(atomic_notifier_chain_unregister(&restart_handler_list, nb));
>
> The only reason why it can fail is if the object pointed to by nb is
> not in the chain.
I had exactly this case where object wasn't in the chain due to a bug
and this warning was very helpful.
> Why WARN() about this? And what about systems with
> panic_on_warn set?
That warning condition will never happen normally, only when something
is seriously wrong.
Those systems with panic_on_warn will get what was they asked for.
