[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190625121334.x3dyvhwsuryxevrz@treble>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 07:13:34 -0500
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
jikos@...nel.org, mbenes@...e.cz, pmladek@...e.com, ast@...nel.org,
daniel@...earbox.net, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Alexios Zavras <alexios.zavras@...el.com>,
Allison Randal <allison@...utok.net>,
Vasily Averin <vvs@...tuozzo.com>,
Todd Brandt <todd.e.brandt@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] notifier: Fix broken error handling pattern
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 09:38:21AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > @@ -156,43 +169,30 @@ int atomic_notifier_chain_unregister(str
> > > }
> > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(atomic_notifier_chain_unregister);
> > >
> > > -/**
> > > - * __atomic_notifier_call_chain - Call functions in an atomic notifier chain
> > > - * @nh: Pointer to head of the atomic notifier chain
> > > - * @val: Value passed unmodified to notifier function
> > > - * @v: Pointer passed unmodified to notifier function
> > > - * @nr_to_call: See the comment for notifier_call_chain.
> > > - * @nr_calls: See the comment for notifier_call_chain.
> > > - *
> > > - * Calls each function in a notifier chain in turn. The functions
> > > - * run in an atomic context, so they must not block.
> > > - * This routine uses RCU to synchronize with changes to the chain.
> > > - *
> > > - * If the return value of the notifier can be and'ed
> > > - * with %NOTIFY_STOP_MASK then atomic_notifier_call_chain()
> > > - * will return immediately, with the return value of
> > > - * the notifier function which halted execution.
> > > - * Otherwise the return value is the return value
> > > - * of the last notifier function called.
> > > - */
> >
> > Why remove the useful comment?
>
> Because I delete the whole function ?
I viewed it as more of a rename... Regardless would the comment not
still be useful for the non-double-underscore version of the function?
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists