[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87y1nip3a1.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2023 18:34:22 +0206
From: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: union: was: Re: [PATCH printk v1 05/18] printk: Add non-BKL
console basic infrastructure
On 2023-03-21, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com> wrote:
> It is not completely clear that that this struct is stored
> as atomic_long_t atomic_state[2] in struct console.
>
> What about adding?
>
> atomic_long_t atomic;
The struct is used to simplify interpretting and creating values to be
stored in the atomic state variable. I do not think it makes sense that
the atomic variable type itself is part of it.
> Anyway, we should at least add a comment into struct console
> about that atomic_state[2] is used to store and access
> struct cons_state an atomic way. Also add a compilation
> check that the size is the same.
A compilation check would be nice. Is that possible?
I am renaming the struct to nbcon_state. Also the variable will be
called nbcon_state. With the description updated, I think it makes it
clearer that "struct nbcon_state" is used to interpret/create values of
console->nbcon_state.
John Ogness
Powered by blists - more mailing lists