Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 26 Jun 2018 10:47:40 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Cc:     Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] fbcon: Call WARN_CONSOLE_UNLOCKED() where
 applicable
Message-ID: <20180626104740.0067bd5e@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <20180626135535.2990-3-hdegoede@redhat.com>
References: <20180626135535.2990-1-hdegoede@redhat.com>
        <20180626135535.2990-3-hdegoede@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 15:55:34 +0200
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:

> Replace comments about places where the console lock should be held with
> calls to WARN_CONSOLE_UNLOCKED() to assert that it is actually held.

Why replace the comments? I prefer them, even with the WARN. The reason
is, when using functions, I don't tend to look inside the function I'm
about to use, but instead, I expect the comment above the function to
have basic information I need to use it. Especially what locks are
expected to be held.

Please keep the comments in place, but the WARNs are fine. They are not
a replacement for the comments.

Nack on removing comments.

-- Steve