10.12.2021 22:44, Dmitry Osipenko пишет:

10.12.2021 22:42, Dmitry Osipenko пишет:
...

quoted

quoted

quoted

There is no strong requirement for priorities to be unique, the reboot.c
code will work properly.

In which case adding the WARN() is not appropriate IMV.

Also I've looked at the existing code and at least in some cases the
order in which the notifiers run doesn't matter.  I'm not sure what
the purpose of this patch is TBH.

The purpose is to let developer know that driver needs to be corrected.

quoted

quoted

The potential problem is on the user's side and the warning is intended
to aid the user.

Unless somebody has the panic_on_warn mentioned previously set and
really the user need not understand what the WARN() is about.  IOW,
WARN() helps developers, not users.

quoted

We can make it a strong requirement, but only after converting and
testing all kernel drivers.

Right.

quoted

I'll consider to add patches for that.

But can you avoid adding more patches to this series?

I won't add more patches since such patches can be added only after
completion of transition to the new API of the whole kernel.

Thank you for the review.

I meant you, Rafael, and Michał, just in case :)