On Sat 04-11-17 03:08:06, Yang Shi wrote: > checkpatch.pl still reports the below in_atomic warning: > > WARNING: use of in_atomic() is incorrect outside core kernel code > + if (in_atomic()) > > But, in_atomic() has been used outside kernel dir for a long time, and > even drivers. So, remove the obsolete rule even though they can be > ignored.
NAK. in_atomic is tricky and shouldn't be used. I would bet most of the usage is simply broken. See more http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected] > Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <[email protected]> > CC: Andrew Morton <[email protected]> > --- > Not sure if removing the obsolete rule is preferred by checkpatch.pl, anyway > it sounds not make sense to keep invalid rule. > > scripts/checkpatch.pl | 11 ----------- > 1 file changed, 11 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > index 8b80bac..e8cf94f 100755 > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > @@ -6231,17 +6231,6 @@ sub process { > "Using $1 should generally have parentheses around > the comparison\n" . $herecurr); > } > > -# whine mightly about in_atomic > - if ($line =~ /\bin_atomic\s*\(/) { > - if ($realfile =~ m@^drivers/@) { > - ERROR("IN_ATOMIC", > - "do not use in_atomic in drivers\n" . > $herecurr); > - } elsif ($realfile !~ m@^kernel/@) { > - WARN("IN_ATOMIC", > - "use of in_atomic() is incorrect outside > core kernel code\n" . $herecurr); > - } > - } > - > # whine about ACCESS_ONCE > if ($^V && $^V ge 5.10.0 && > $line =~ > /\bACCESS_ONCE\s*$balanced_parens\s*(=(?!=))?\s*($FuncArg)?/) { > -- > 1.8.3.1 -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
