From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2F7F3C5DA3
	for <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 24 Mar 2026 22:12:27 +0000 (UTC)
Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201
ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116;
	t=1774390348; cv=none; b=nZcNDEMdpwJfCEcOjwl3ILuDxNerbkq737ocyTKxKVqMUr+A/ey66UMC97v0RmbZpPQQJIkaY/44RI9Bq+VuiEgG8eOCrg4d3nfn+q9yxPKP4aQHmaOkTICvTMpMinxQZpaiUMKDL1HtsHI7J4DWJ0870/2WmRIw8kpj9FZV0yU=
ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org;
	s=arc-20240116; t=1774390348; c=relaxed/simple;
	bh=nsVbNJ1Ddzssv9wKxd9k0JfSEw5tzSYD0qJRtXU1QNM=;
	h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References:
	 Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=Wv091nOETScZ1D3UoaliSq02XBzdmEuaBkU0k7ZnWjxgGePySjfQywde35mC1Y30Rt2/4n3ZaOz42z5+HPKWnsWZCqYoluqhBW3mXD4HOgaJwjQzuYFrYYSlVrlNbn3bSjb37QeQrDN7x/FUebE+7WjFgXMiDEiV51YJ5R1nhc4=
ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.b=eTmOoMGe; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201
Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org;
	dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.b="eTmOoMGe"
Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 794D6C19424;
	Tue, 24 Mar 2026 22:12:27 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linux-foundation.org;
	s=korg; t=1774390347;
	bh=nsVbNJ1Ddzssv9wKxd9k0JfSEw5tzSYD0qJRtXU1QNM=;
	h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=eTmOoMGeCCpPK9U+y9EjV4ZN0oFKeZ/BxM9lFBiqySxRPOVyMgvFldgPMl1NXT9ye
	 DUmO7mOBcVfa+db7VnsEhIm/3kLPTNvo5tGZq9IoehYA2DzvnNO4RGgUHYXAaNh1Kn
	 SgEWDB3DmMw4vTLUMrUonR8iSd6tjyJcB5jdnGBI=
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 15:12:27 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
 Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>, Nathan Chancellor
 <nathan@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib: Split codetag_lock_module_list()
Message-Id: <20260324151227.7bd7a52c1403cb4882ab713e@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20260324214226.3684605-1-bvanassche@acm.org>
References: <20260324214226.3684605-1-bvanassche@acm.org>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.8.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Precedence: bulk
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:linux-kernel+subscribe@vger.kernel.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:linux-kernel+unsubscribe@vger.kernel.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Tue, 24 Mar 2026 14:42:25 -0700 Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> wrote:

> Letting a function argument indicate whether a lock or unlock operation
> should be performed is incompatible with compile-time analysis of
> locking operations by sparse and Clang.

And it makes Linus mad.

> Hence, split
> codetag_lock_module_list() into two functions: a function that locks
> cttype->mod_lock and another function that unlocks cttype->mod_lock. No
> functionality has been changed. See also commit 916cc5167cc6 ("lib: code
> tagging framework").

Thanks.  I'd prefer to park this for the next cycle.  The amount of
material I'm sitting on is excessive and I'm trying to give
reviews&testers time to catch up.