Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:3;
Date:   Mon, 23 Oct 2023 09:15:11 -0700
From:   Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To:     Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@quicinc.com>
Cc:     russell.h.weight@intel.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
        rafael@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] firmware_loader: Abort new fw load request once
 firmware core knows about reboot
Message-ID: <ZTacD4tWZHrzhmQT@bombadil.infradead.org>
References: <1696482420-1329-1-git-send-email-quic_mojha@quicinc.com>
 <ZTF+QLjm8ceL9a00@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <a0c294e1-f76a-6382-ee0f-f1d75ac9d781@quicinc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <a0c294e1-f76a-6382-ee0f-f1d75ac9d781@quicinc.com>
Sender: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@infradead.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 06:11:18PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> However, if you think we should rename this
> 'only_kill_custom' to something like its inverse 'kill_all' and reverse the
> below check to be more meaningful now ?
> 
>    		if (kill_all || !fw_priv->need_uevent)

This seems like a better approach to make the intent clear and avoid
future confusion.

  Luis