On 26.04.2025 00:18, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Thu, 3 Apr 2025, dm...@proton.me wrote: >> From: Denis Mukhin <dmuk...@ford.com> >> >> Move console_locks_busted handling inside conring_puts() to remove >> tasklet code duplication. >> >> Signed-off-by: Denis Mukhin <dmuk...@ford.com> > > This patch is a good cleanup but makes one functional change: previously > guest_console_write would always call tasklet_schedule. Now, it only > calls tasklet_schedule if !console_locks_busted. > > On ARM, we don't call console_force_unlock and never set > console_locks_busted. It makes no difference. > > On x86, there are a few callers of console_force_unlock, so it would > make a difference. However, looking at the callers, it seems to me that > the change is for the better and better aligns the code with the > intention behind console_force_unlock.
Denis, I see you submitted v2 without any adjustment to the description. With Stefano having pointed out the aspect, it should have been pretty clear that such a (kind of hidden) functional change wants justifying. Furthermore, you added Stefano's R-b without any hint towards the extra request he had put up above wrt x86. Jan
