[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <94b76f8d-5886-4a1e-8469-712be369ee9e@web.de>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 08:33:24 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, imx@...ts.linux.dev
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@....com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Shenwei Wang <shenwei.wang@....com>
Subject: Re: [v2] net: fec: Convert fec driver to use lock guards
> This patch has been rejected because netdev people don't want these sort of
> conversions at present which will make backporting more difficult.
Advanced development tools can help to adjust involved concerns another bit.
Some contributors got used to capabilities of the semantic patch language
(Coccinelle software) for example.
Will any clarifications become more helpful here?
Would you get useful insights from special information sources?
Looking at guard usage (with SmPL)
https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/2dc6a1c7-79bf-42e3-95cc-599a1e154f57@web.de/
https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/cocci/2024-05/msg00090.html
> The LOCK EVASION issue has been fixed by another patch.
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240521023800.17102-1-wei.fang@nxp.com
Further software evolution might become more interesting also around
the commit 3b1c92f8e5371700fada307cc8fd2c51fa7bc8c1 ("net: fec:
avoid lock evasion when reading pps_enable").
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists