From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp6-g21.free.fr (smtp6-g21.free.fr [212.27.42.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32CE738757A; Wed, 13 May 2026 12:12:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=212.27.42.6 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778674352; cv=none; b=mp2URQYJXvtUZu0APrZw95wGgRUf7b0ervXKBUJvIUjvkOBjyad3Tm9btXxjYcJT/L613cfW4Enu5qUCsbT93s59V+2nh8a4+i2sOnGWAGL9DrUIOAPXtnPICpYy2JNO68DPbnI09qamSad/RCi/G2n8xNMK8qTagY3RvWfPT9s= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778674352; c=relaxed/simple; bh=r2Dj6pgb05sGqy8+CBz+pNVOM3RfODC5fFqrnDg+k5g=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=AxEyxyeo+HyTV0wKOWLQOjNSL7DjWIU2kjejTJqSKf0xZg9deZRusvH22u0QFbKlL3KXEm/aciQ6bJzUFUepIzIEazTWP2rmyKWpm5Xo2GOxcvecXSVVf+4QojC5TlMILJ2v46Pur/1zz2jvtLiaAghAbNrDK2qM/3VkPLitCzs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=free.fr; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=free.fr; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=free.fr header.i=@free.fr header.b=Oh+JspMl; arc=none smtp.client-ip=212.27.42.6 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=free.fr Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=free.fr Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=free.fr header.i=@free.fr header.b="Oh+JspMl" Received: from Gigabyte.tail209581.ts.net (unknown [IPv6:2a02:8428:7df0:ac01:62d2:7d04:a603:94c1]) (Authenticated sender: jnilo@free.fr) by smtp6-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9C2B27803A2; Wed, 13 May 2026 14:12:21 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=free.fr; s=smtp-20201208; t=1778674348; bh=r2Dj6pgb05sGqy8+CBz+pNVOM3RfODC5fFqrnDg+k5g=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Oh+JspMlyAHNuXMXogHIjbqAIxX1q51TowE43kHrmCLsQuI2ICWoFoXf2Oe3zZ+8A B4iEFpl7+q9u6P7uYyE2SxDbNWqjuuNvNeLXz7fsigSIhfdKaTLdCTpkKWiIikTAdv UuhGGLrtGwQodiLYIknrazD75Ek6TKvDk2u5J9XGjJIogbmZBsR17/9anNHt/RPYxI Jxdva4cjXnQvdKwXeXWGOGXZErvUU/gWbcQgHIx7r7dR9nVOCLTkAgT4UaevcxnOg6 jpZ5eSEjFbt0OXWOB7AqbuujNuW/AbY48rxVLlPnjWfXC69Dyqfft76nhEbyhHwf+x b27C7R0JKV8Xg== From: Jacques Nilo To: =?UTF-8?q?Ilpo=20J=C3=A4rvinen?= Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jiri Slaby , Andy Shevchenko , linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jacques Nilo Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] serial: core: introduce guard(uart_port_lock_sysrq_irqsave) Date: Wed, 13 May 2026 14:10:56 +0200 Message-ID: <20260513121205.45921-1-jnilo@free.fr> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.43.0 In-Reply-To: <3439217b-90b5-5d21-e777-d238b3ffc1a0@linux.intel.com> References: <3439217b-90b5-5d21-e777-d238b3ffc1a0@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Wed, 13 May 2026, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: > > +DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(uart_port_lock_sysrq_irqsave, struct uart_port, > > I suppose the "check" in the name is kind of important detail so maybe > it shouldn't be dropped from the guard name. Quick clarification before I respin: do you want this renamed in v2? I dropped the "check_" segment because the existing guard(uart_port_lock_irqsave) doesn't mirror its destructor's name either (it expands to uart_port_unlock_irqrestore, not uart_port_lock_irqsave_and_unlock_irqrestore), and the longer uart_port_lock_check_sysrq_irqsave starts to feel verbose. But I see the symmetry argument with uart_unlock_and_check_sysrq_irqrestore() and I have no strong attachment to the shorter name. If you'd like the rename, I'll do it for v2. If you're fine either way, I'll keep the current name -- patches 2/3 and 3/3 already have your Reviewed-by trailers on the call sites and I'd rather not invalidate those over a naming choice. The other points (commit-message reflow, Cc: stable on 1/3, single-line destructor formatting) are unambiguous and will land in v2 regardless. Thanks for the review. -- Jacques