Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc:     "linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] task_work: cleanup notification modes
In-Reply-To: <aaed79d1-972f-e4bd-f3ac-d589cd729163@kernel.dk>
References: <93292d5b-9124-d252-c81f-1f2cfbd60e7b@kernel.dk> <87tuutalre.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <aaed79d1-972f-e4bd-f3ac-d589cd729163@kernel.dk>
Date:   Sat, 17 Oct 2020 01:09:46 +0200
Message-ID: <87zh4lix8l.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Oct 16 2020 at 16:39, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 10/16/20 3:44 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> - * @notify: send the notification if true
>>> + * @notify: send chosen notification, if any
>> 
>> Is that really all you found to be wrong in that comment?
>
> There really is nothing wrong, but it's not very descriptive (wasn't
> before either).

 * This is like the signal handler which runs in kernel mode, but it doesn't                                                                                                                                                                                                   
 * try to wake up the @task.   

If find a lot of wrongs in that sentence in context of TWA_SIGNAL.

Agreed, it was hard to understand before that, but with TWA_SIGNAL it
does not make sense at all.

Thanks,

        tglx