Re: [PATCH v2 12/12] reboot: use devm_blocking_notifier_chain_register()
flat view
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
Date: 2026-07-26 05:07:00
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider: - [Medium] The commit message incorrectly claims to replace the `blocking_notifier_chain_register() + devm_add_action_or_reset()` pattern, which was not used in the original code. --
--- Patch [12]: [PATCH v2 12/12] reboot: use devm_blocking_notifier_chain_register() ---commit 8cd90dfccbe30e1a7f1ea6421b385708237370fb Author: Eliav Farber [off-list ref] reboot: use devm_blocking_notifier_chain_register() This commit replaces the manual devres allocation and registration pattern in devm_register_reboot_notifier() with a direct call to devm_blocking_notifier_chain_register(). It also drops the now unused devm_unregister_reboot_notifier() callback.
Replace the blocking_notifier_chain_register() + devm_add_action_or_reset() pattern with a single call to devm_blocking_notifier_chain_register(), removing the devm_unregister_reboot_notifier() callback.
[Severity: Medium]
This isn't a bug, but does the commit message accurately describe the old
code?
Looking at the original implementation of devm_register_reboot_notifier()
in kernel/reboot.c, it didn't use devm_add_action_or_reset(), but rather
manually allocated the devres struct:
rcnb = devres_alloc(devm_unregister_reboot_notifier,
sizeof(*rcnb), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!rcnb)
return -ENOMEM;
ret = register_reboot_notifier(nb);
Could the commit message be updated to accurately reflect the pattern that
was actually removed from the code?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260726045706.8169-1-farbere@amazon.com?part=12