Re: [PATCH] fs/resctrl: using guard to simplify lock/unlock code

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Su Hui <suhui@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/resctrl: using guard to simplify lock/unlock code
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2025 18:11:36 +0300
Cc: tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx, reinette.chatre@xxxxxxxxx, Dave.Martin@xxxxxxx, james.morse@xxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kernel-janitors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20250623112540.3581675-1-suhui@nfschina.com>
References: <20250623112540.3581675-1-suhui@nfschina.com>

This seems fine to me, but I don't think anyone is eager to start
reviewing hundreds of guard() conversions unless they're in new code
or part of a bug fix.

regards,
dan carpenter

References:
- [PATCH] fs/resctrl: using guard to simplify lock/unlock code
  - From: Su Hui

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] fs/proc/vmcore: a few cleanups for vmcore_add_device_dump
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] fs/resctrl: using guard to simplify lock/unlock code
Previous by thread: [PATCH] fs/resctrl: using guard to simplify lock/unlock code
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] fs/resctrl: using guard to simplify lock/unlock code
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Kernel Development] [Kernel Announce] [Kernel Newbies] [Linux Networking Development] [Share Photos] [IDE] [Security] [Git] [Netfilter] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Device Mapper]

Powered by Linux