On 6/3/2025 10:07 AM, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 5/13/25 13:37, Sohil Mehta wrote: >> - retval = register_nmi_handler(NMI_IO_CHECK, hpwdt_pretimeout, 0, "hpwdt"); >> + retval = register_nmi_handler(NMI_IO_CHECK, hpwdt_pretimeout, 0, "hpwdt", 0); >> if (retval) > > Could we get rid of all these random 0's, please? (or at least try to > keep them from proliferating). > I had patches for avoiding both zeros, but I ended up not including them. I wasn't sure if folks prefer '0' when not using a parameter or explicitly prefer to deny. > Either do a: > > register_nmi_handler_source() > > that takes a source and leave > > register_nmi_handler() > > in place and not take a source. Or, do this: > > retval = register_nmi_handler(NMI_IO_CHECK, hpwdt_pretimeout, > 0, "hpwdt", NMI_NO_SOURCE); > I prefer this approach. Since we are touching all these lines, maybe it's a good time to get rid of the other 0 as well (in a separate patch). The 3rd parameter pertains to handler "flags". The only flag in use right now is NMI_FLAG_FIRST. Assuming that more flags might get added later, the 0 should probably correspond to NMI_FLAG_NONE. Agree? The other option would be NMI_FLAG_LAST, which would be the opposite of NMI_FLAG_FIRST, but that seems shortsighted. > where the 0 is at least given a symbolic name.
