From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5912FC433EF for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 14:32:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231671AbiDSOf2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Apr 2022 10:35:28 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51542 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1353470AbiDSOfZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Apr 2022 10:35:25 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-x72d.google.com (mail-qk1-x72d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CE771E3CA for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 07:32:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x72d.google.com with SMTP id d198so10405692qkc.12 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 07:32:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=36yPd8hRpBAtwmc9BbcuXuK1dDwsE+5q9Lw2l5HaECk=; b=lJw2pvlf5aQG7lTxb1WHpUHmXI7wu12++VUnDtF7iQTo0YP6PZZAqKfan/wzxLJBPa ubZO1RNlY8QOiVU5ezQoVTJbW8GDo+Od40jOQ9Xh9qnkR1QbJnB7eaippGJQ0nhBbX8E JFABajXyG3bIJnBtw2wwPC39ZreM22V4EZJNPh90RzwfaeaY6GoQDLGeRAcUO758rXpv pPeygw9qyKEs7OP5oYCWeoZBlFy2wgTmRl/5tdbhi/Gybi3EqwptkbPzddC0mmtvIC3k ZcCgamkt0fJ4VFcjQxwOvZVgMIgvLVCzUcvyVjUOjsWDzAIExOduu+tcq7YDW4j0iDuX l37w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=36yPd8hRpBAtwmc9BbcuXuK1dDwsE+5q9Lw2l5HaECk=; b=nmYNdnLua8uhZUMVmvHL1RfI32C8ztKFs8DGEs4UzifX/dE8JtRqSg9V6lp5ZmnV99 2bKtVeXfyC7gYT67laK+FIJJHhfredjCwJkqhQq+pPZlPXmhEoOUy40ndUyCXTt+p/BB xA4pb22bNV7y8Eur4yaQ7qcucGb56WcplRqZAcbldtMhv4wffOP7HfSalf/zGk4/K2Kj WkVi61XNGDA+VNbclibEiIJvhR3knvW09h8mRwM7QVuCUPmhKT+tZmJ1oCBcUIBM8DRM Jx9L4xagGKbHQ5tw1WGes0dkIPnrb1kbNxmufaRKE3kmzBrgZnNU1P58B0ekObOnpAYL nJuA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532WFd+0XsJ0vhF+CcFlK+U90PY0PpZpNEDD8tbYtXSPLahk9m+v DFrpFBcOemEl2su6opwQIfE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxklBlhUP98RmmfoZay7wo7kZBet7NflSGuzdroUiMAkEzE8+0o7c+2Trg6Mf1/zJK/j7bafQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:147c:b0:69e:6f6b:872b with SMTP id j28-20020a05620a147c00b0069e6f6b872bmr9465644qkl.675.1650378756523; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 07:32:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2600:1700:2442:6db0:98ed:ab24:32f:21f2? ([2600:1700:2442:6db0:98ed:ab24:32f:21f2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b2-20020ac87fc2000000b002f11f6dd5cdsm106551qtk.23.2022.04.19.07.32.35 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 19 Apr 2022 07:32:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <654db7b8-1254-88e9-f668-b1b14abc3e3e@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 09:32:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: overlay: do not break notify on NOTIFY_OK Content-Language: en-US To: =?UTF-8?Q?Nuno_S=c3=a1?= , =?UTF-8?Q?Nuno_S=c3=a1?= , devicetree@vger.kernel.org Cc: Rob Herring , Pantelis Antoniou , Alan Tull , Alan Tull References: <20220404074055.95618-1-nuno.sa@analog.com> <01e77fbd-5c26-6b15-be1f-f962aa4190c6@gmail.com> <9bde64d0c05a37e72fabbeb39d8d2fe099526917.camel@gmail.com> From: Frank Rowand In-Reply-To: <9bde64d0c05a37e72fabbeb39d8d2fe099526917.camel@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi Rob, Nuno, (adding cc: Alan) You just applied the patch at the root of this email thread. Please either revert it and accept the alternate that Nuno suggests below, or if you do not want to follow that path, then Nuno please add a follow on patch that does what you suggest below. -Frank On 4/5/22 02:19, Nuno Sá wrote: > On Mon, 2022-04-04 at 13:10 -0500, Frank Rowand wrote: >> On 4/4/22 02:40, Nuno Sá wrote: >>> We should not break overlay notifications on NOTIFY_OK otherwise we >>> might >>> break on the first fragment. As NOTIFY_OK is not zero, we need to >>> account for that when looking for errors. >> >> It's been a long time since I've looked at notifiers, it will take me >> some time to >> review this. >> >> -Frank >> >>> > > Yeah, it was also my first time looking at of dynamic code. But it just > didn't felt right to stop fragmment notifications if someone returns > NOTIFY_OK. In fact, I'm starting to think that even if someone wants to > NOTIFY_STOP on the current fragment, that should not mean we should not > send notifications for the remaining ones. So, maybe the right patch is > actually something like: > > ret = blocking_notifier_call_chain() > if (notifier_to_errno(ret)) > return notifier_to_errno(ret); > > This would also be more in line (not totally identical) with > '__of_changeset_revert_notify()'. > > - Nuno Sá > >> >> >