From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: "Thomas Weißschuh" <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree with the mm-unstable tree
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2025 12:55:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251114115538.GA13469@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251114094900-ca266dde-cf71-4536-882d-dcc8591fe6bd@linutronix.de>
On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 10:13:40AM +0100, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> We have the 'Context:' tag in kdoc. What about the following?
>
> Context: Any context. Takes and releases pool->lock.
Which in this case would be ok. But what about functions that take
non-irqsave spinlocks?
> I used the function in a tracepoint handler [0] and trusted its documentation
> to "never sleep". That turned out to be incorrect.
Heh, you'll find a lot of those..
> Also see the discussion on the patch submission [1] about just this point,
> where we didn't come up with better wording.
Can we please start a discussion on this on say linux-doc and
linux-kernel? I don't really have a good answer, but this current
idea feels a bit lacking. I don't meant that as trying to block
this patch, but I think we need to come up with a better convention.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-14 11:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-14 4:13 linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree with the mm-unstable tree Stephen Rothwell
2025-11-14 5:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 8:46 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-11-14 9:13 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-11-14 11:55 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2025-11-20 13:31 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-11-20 17:51 ` Vlastimil Babka
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-09-04 6:29 Stephen Rothwell
2025-09-04 8:39 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-09-04 21:39 ` Andrew Morton
2025-09-04 6:20 Stephen Rothwell
2025-07-21 4:20 Stephen Rothwell
2025-07-21 19:38 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-07-21 21:35 ` Luiz Capitulino
2025-07-22 8:30 ` Vlastimil Babka
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20251114115538.GA13469@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox