Hi,
On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 3:46 PM Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 7:56 AM John Ogness <john.ogness@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Replace (console->flags & CON_ENABLED) usage with console_is_enabled().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: John Ogness <john.ogness@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/tty/serial/kgdboc.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/kgdboc.c b/drivers/tty/serial/kgdboc.c
> > index e76f0186c335..b17aa7e49894 100644
> > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/kgdboc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/kgdboc.c
> > @@ -533,7 +533,7 @@ static int __init kgdboc_earlycon_init(char *opt)
> > console_lock();
> > for_each_console(con) {
> > if (con->write && con->read &&
> > - (con->flags & (CON_BOOT | CON_ENABLED)) &&
> > + (console_is_enabled(con) || (con->flags & CON_BOOT)) &&
>
> <shrug>. I guess this is OK, but it feels a little pointless. If we're
> still directly looking at the CON_BOOT bit in con->flags it seems
> weird to be accessing CON_ENABLED through a special wrapper that's
> marked as a `data_race`. In our case it's _not_ a data race, right,
> since this function continues to hold the console_lock() even at the
> end of the series? I personally would drop this patch but if you
> really want it I won't object.
I realized that my statement isn't quite true. It actually only holds
console_list_lock() even at the end of the series. Still, it seems
weird that we're declaring the `data_race` on CON_ENABLED but not
CON_BOOT ?
