Re: [PATCH RFC] wimax/i2400m: fixup completion handling for resetting a device
From: Nicholas Mc Guire
Date: Mon Mar 30 2015 - 20:44:53 EST
On Fri, 27 Mar 2015, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello.
>
> On 03/20/2015 10:47 AM, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
>
> Sorry for late reply, I'm pretty busy these days.
no hurry on this - this is cleanup work only
>
>>>> wait_for_completion_timeout return 0 (timeout) or >=1 (completion) so the check
>>>> for > 0 in the else branch is always true and can be dropped. The comment seems
>>>> misleading as it is always going to pass the result up.
>
>>>> The sync of the completion access with __i2400m_dev_reset_handle (which checks
>>>> for if (i2400m->reset_ctx) could race if i2400m_reset() returns negative so
>>>> the resetting of i2400m->reset_ctx == NULL is moved to the out: path.
>
>>>> As wait_for_completion_timeout returns unsigned long not int, an appropriately
>>>> named variable of type unsigned long is added and assignments fixed up.
>
>>> Don't try to do several things in one patch.
>
>> normaly yes - this was marked as RFC and if I had split it up into
>> 3 patches it would be hard to see how it fits together without
>> actually applying them.
>
> You could summarize your intent in the cover letter (PATCH #0).
>
ok - in that case I will repost as you suggested - just thought it
is more readable to keep it in one patch for resolving the open
questions.
>> The intent was to get feedback notably on moving i2400m->reset_ctx == NULL
>> and if dropping the (I think missleading) comment about negative return is ok
>
>> Should this be in seperate patches even as RFC ?
>
> I think the RFC patches should still conform to all the usual patch
> rules. How would we understand whether you intent to split the patch up
> later, if you didn't even write about it anywhere?
>
I had assumed that a RFC is not intended to be applied anywhere buyt only for review - will clean it up and put the relevant patched code snippet
in #0 then for review.
thx!
hofrat
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/