Re: [v8 3/3] PCI: amd-mdb: Add AMD MDB Root Port driver

Re: [v8 3/3] PCI: amd-mdb: Add AMD MDB Root Port driver

[Markus Elfring]

> I don't *really* like guard() anyway because it's kind of magic in
> that the unlock doesn't actually appear in the code, and it's kind of
> hard to unravel what guard() is and how it works.  But I guess that's
> mostly because it's just a new idiom that takes time to internalize.
How will the circumstances evolve further for growing applications of
scope-based resource management?

Regards,
Markus

Re: [v8 3/3] PCI: amd-mdb: Add AMD MDB Root Port driver

[Manivannan Sadhasivam]

On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 07:39:03AM +0100, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > I don't *really* like guard() anyway because it's kind of magic in
> > that the unlock doesn't actually appear in the code, and it's kind of
> > hard to unravel what guard() is and how it works.  But I guess that's
> > mostly because it's just a new idiom that takes time to internalize.
> How will the circumstances evolve further for growing applications of
> scope-based resource management?
> 

Please ignore the comments from Markus.

Reference: https://lkml.org/lkml/2024/5/20/724

- Mani

-- 
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்

Re: [v8 3/3] PCI: amd-mdb: Add AMD MDB Root Port driver

[Markus Elfring]

> Please ignore the comments from Markus.
I hope that patch review and software development discussions can become more constructive again
also for related topics.

Regards,
Markus

Re: [v8 3/3] PCI: amd-mdb: Add AMD MDB Root Port driver

[Bjorn Helgaas]

On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 07:39:03AM +0100, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > I don't *really* like guard() anyway because it's kind of magic in
> > that the unlock doesn't actually appear in the code, and it's kind of
> > hard to unravel what guard() is and how it works.  But I guess that's
> > mostly because it's just a new idiom that takes time to internalize.
>
> How will the circumstances evolve further for growing applications of
> scope-based resource management?

I'm sure it will evolve to become the typical style.  Right now, it's
not quite there yet, as evidenced by the fact that the only reference
to them in Documentation/ is this somewhat ambivalent note:

  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst?id=v6.13#n380

We do already have a few uses of guard() and scoped_guard() in
drivers/pci, and I don't really object to more, including in this
amd-mdb case.  Whatever we do, I *would* want to do it consistently
throughout the file.

Bjorn

Re: [v8 3/3] PCI: amd-mdb: Add AMD MDB Root Port driver

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 12/02/2025 00:16, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 07:39:03AM +0100, Markus Elfring wrote:
>>> I don't *really* like guard() anyway because it's kind of magic in
>>> that the unlock doesn't actually appear in the code, and it's kind of
>>> hard to unravel what guard() is and how it works.  But I guess that's
>>> mostly because it's just a new idiom that takes time to internalize.
>>
>> How will the circumstances evolve further for growing applications of
>> scope-based resource management?
> 
> I'm sure it will evolve to become the typical style.  Right now, it's
> not quite there yet, as evidenced by the fact that the only reference
> to them in Documentation/ is this somewhat ambivalent note:
> 
>   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst?id=v6.13#n380
> 
> We do already have a few uses of guard() and scoped_guard() in
> drivers/pci, and I don't really object to more, including in this
> amd-mdb case.  Whatever we do, I *would* want to do it consistently
> throughout the file.


Bjorn,
There is little point in discussing anything with Markus. It's a person
known to waste our time.

Best regards,
Krzysztof