[PATCH 2/7] watchdog/hardlockup: Make the config checks more straightforward

Doug Anderson dianders at chromium.org
Wed Jun 14 23:47:19 AEST 2023


On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 3:29 AM Petr Mladek <pmladek at suse.com> wrote:
> It seems that we have entered into a bike shedding mode.
> The following questions come to my mind:
>    1. Does this patchset improve the current state?
>    2. Maybe, it is not black&white. Is it possible to summarize
>       what exactly got better and what got worse?
> Maybe, there is no need to do bike-shedding about every step
> if the final result is reasonable and the steps are not
> completely wrong.
> I just followed my intuition and tried to do some changes step
> by step. I got lost many times so maybe the steps are not
> ideal. Anyway, the steps helped me to understand the logic
> and stay reasonably confident that they did not change
> the behavior.
> I could rework the patchset. But I first need to know what
> exactly is bad in the result. And eventually if there is more
> logical way how to end there.

Sure. I still feel like the end result of the CONFIG options after
your whole patchset is easier to understand / cleaner by adjusting the
dependencies as I have suggested. That being said, I agree that it is
the type of thing that can be more a matter of personal preference. I
do agree that, even if you don't take my suggestion of adjusting the
dependencies, the end result of your patchset still makes things
better than they were.

...so if you really feel strongly that things are more understandable
with the dependencies specified as you have, I won't stand in the way.
I still think you need a v2, though, just to address other nits.


More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list