10.12.2021 22:44, Dmitry Osipenko пишет: > 10.12.2021 22:42, Dmitry Osipenko пишет: > ... >>>> There is no strong requirement for priorities to be unique, the reboot.c >>>> code will work properly. >>> >>> In which case adding the WARN() is not appropriate IMV. >>> >>> Also I've looked at the existing code and at least in some cases the >>> order in which the notifiers run doesn't matter. I'm not sure what >>> the purpose of this patch is TBH. >> >> The purpose is to let developer know that driver needs to be corrected. >> >>>> The potential problem is on the user's side and the warning is intended >>>> to aid the user. >>> >>> Unless somebody has the panic_on_warn mentioned previously set and >>> really the user need not understand what the WARN() is about. IOW, >>> WARN() helps developers, not users. >>> >>>> We can make it a strong requirement, but only after converting and >>>> testing all kernel drivers. >>> >>> Right. >>> >>>> I'll consider to add patches for that. >>> >>> But can you avoid adding more patches to this series? >> >> I won't add more patches since such patches can be added only after >> completion of transition to the new API of the whole kernel. >> > > Thank you for the review. > I meant you, Rafael, and Michał, just in case :)
