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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] fbcon: Call WARN_CONSOLE_UNLOCKED() where
 applicable
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
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
References: <20180626135535.2990-1-hdegoede@redhat.com>
 <20180626135535.2990-3-hdegoede@redhat.com>
 <20180626104740.0067bd5e@gandalf.local.home>
From:   Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <91a98281-979f-9479-a31a-363243948372@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 Jun 2018 20:29:07 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180626104740.0067bd5e@gandalf.local.home>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On 26-06-18 16:47, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> 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.

Ok, I will submit a v4 with the comments left in place.

Regards,

Hans