From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.13]) (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 3D46B3EE1C1; Wed, 13 May 2026 12:21:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.13 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778674902; cv=none; b=fVel6i87v9T9zb/PTIg/7xAU/OhUraO/HpB8jgja4LBgE0tQqpmS9peY7CxtPdACYalWD4l7Ofk9K8tXszoqc7nM2indgQxMMOOr+pDMyJfRH/Cvgz+wEP3vNEeYxsu5eHSvqI3DYr7WSNndvCX2zmA5HGrke3Aq2bKm4G6/6AI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778674902; c=relaxed/simple; bh=nPm/wSE0+OEeAtE7bVcSR+O7c7s18K8e/rVXiNhQrfk=; h=From:Date:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=hcTqSC+r7sMxD3JbWWkz/6Caq537I7wjKyYKBwur1SzlypBvU507HcizyvsyPhfX7eQ0QjAwvTkvJ8jIhM1OPAnbZ+NTJr+ELIYg4HoKs8mn5lpjhYfJeT5MqItGgpBKzAVbid1w0YMi8ocL1TS/t9j4/s/uFQ/tbKgOBK8GpFo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=NRQIDOrd; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.13 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="NRQIDOrd" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1778674901; x=1810210901; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version; bh=nPm/wSE0+OEeAtE7bVcSR+O7c7s18K8e/rVXiNhQrfk=; b=NRQIDOrdt7itftEAx+404/lK4LA3oJpy4hgGgY60PpZfPYhafbqe//Mk cOoBuQpX+3hW+S6ee0pRl0KmhK/LLVNDCEca6F+B+N//KFp1Q89HUTXtp riaWKXhPjEvQSMjXZh27uKw6g8J02neQMa0JmPz9B9GiH8TGS6qHEtxXI q7n68CLBh2RDmPzlW5UmVo4aMl9zJ0p3mrjKiePb9gNQiLeo08gNCNRME t9yeo+HHv17DMtTqQA0QgcQQk8U1DlJMC12bYj3O/2c34FU089C3kzlBY jrA/ypJzGTYvmKobGNWtkn/90yBu1UXurcQPrLWSVeQKdEkAn3ZkN57Tj Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: mK1H9+h2RiqDLC4HipALAw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: SlRLNnHYQKuSPRq+Y6i1zA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11784"; a="90701304" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.23,232,1770624000"; d="scan'208";a="90701304" Received: from fmviesa010.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.150]) by orvoesa105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 May 2026 05:21:40 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: pek5dWe5TKW7gbqEemXsgA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: TOByA4PKSVygE9Wb0zs8aA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.23,232,1770624000"; d="scan'208";a="233801208" Received: from ijarvine-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.244.110]) by fmviesa010-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 May 2026 05:21:38 -0700 From: =?UTF-8?q?Ilpo=20J=C3=A4rvinen?= Date: Wed, 13 May 2026 15:21:35 +0300 (EEST) To: Jacques Nilo cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jiri Slaby , Andy Shevchenko , linux-serial , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] serial: core: introduce guard(uart_port_lock_sysrq_irqsave) In-Reply-To: <20260513121205.45921-1-jnilo@free.fr> Message-ID: References: <3439217b-90b5-5d21-e777-d238b3ffc1a0@linux.intel.com> <20260513121205.45921-1-jnilo@free.fr> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="8323328-1942567383-1778674895=:12534" This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323328-1942567383-1778674895=:12534 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE On Wed, 13 May 2026, Jacques Nilo wrote: > On Wed, 13 May 2026, Ilpo J=C3=A4rvinen wrote: >=20 > > > +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. >=20 > Quick clarification before I respin: do you want this renamed in v2? >=20 > 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. I meant guard(uart_port_lock_check_sysrq_irqsave) The point is it does "check" sysrq. Though I admit I'm starting to see now= =20 why you had irqsave earlier placed before sysrq. It still fits to the expected indentation levels pretty well. > 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. >=20 > The other points (commit-message reflow, Cc: stable on 1/3, > single-line destructor formatting) are unambiguous and will land in > v2 regardless. >=20 > Thanks for the review. >=20 > -- > Jacques >=20 --=20 i. --8323328-1942567383-1778674895=:12534--