On 2/1/23 8:08 AM, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote: > This small series is based on Paul's "dev" branch. Head is 6002817348a1c610dc1b1c01ff81654cdec12be4 > it renames a single argument of k[v]free_rcu() to its new k[v]free_rcu_mightsleep() name. > > 1. > The problem is that, recently we have run into a precedent when > a user intended to give a second argument to kfree_rcu() API but > forgot to do it in a code so a call became as a single argument > of kfree_rcu() API. > > 2. > Such mistyping can lead to hidden bags where sleeping is forbidden. > > 3. > _mightsleep() prefix gives much more information for which contexts > it can be used for. This patchset seems weird to me. We have a LOT of calls that might sleep, yet we don't suffix them all with _mightsleep(). Why is this any different? Why isn't this just a might_sleep() call in the actual helper, which will suffice for checkers and catch it at runtime as well. -- Jens Axboe
