[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b566459c-b0b6-4019-8231-04d246f07b0d@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 07:54:30 +0200
From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [patch V2 02/45] genirq/irqdesc: Switch to lock guards
On 29. 04. 25, 8:54, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Replace all lock/unlock pairs with lock guards and simplify the code flow.
>
> No functional change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
>
> ---
> kernel/irq/irqdesc.c | 127 +++++++++++++++++----------------------------------
> 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 84 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/kernel/irq/irqdesc.c
> +++ b/kernel/irq/irqdesc.c
...
> @@ -569,12 +539,12 @@ static int alloc_descs(unsigned int star
> return -ENOMEM;
> }
>
> -static int irq_expand_nr_irqs(unsigned int nr)
> +static bool irq_expand_nr_irqs(unsigned int nr)
Here you do ^^^ and:
...
> @@ -677,14 +645,13 @@ static inline int alloc_descs(unsigned i
>
> static int irq_expand_nr_irqs(unsigned int nr)
This was omitted from my prev review -- needs to return bool here too.
> {
> - return -ENOMEM;
> + return false;
> }
thanks,
--
js
suse labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists