linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
To: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com>
Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@arm.com>,
	Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	nd@arm.com, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add documentation on meaning of -EPROBE_DEFER
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2020 11:03:51 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200328110351.4e50491e@lwn.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGETcx_0=W6P_Zf-6fvDfncXUrPvt31bf6de-RWwHaXtwJizmQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 27 Mar 2020 16:55:34 -0700
Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com> wrote:

> > > The infinite loop is a current implementation behavior. Not an
> > > intentional choice. So, maybe we can say the behavior is undefined
> > > instead?  
> >
> > If you feel strongly about it, but I don't have any problem with
> > documenting it as the current implementation behaviour, and then
> > changing the text if that ever changes.  
> 
> Assuming Greg is okay with this doc update, I'm kinda leaning towards
> "undefined" because if documented as "infinite loop" people might be
> hesitant towards removing that behavior. But I'll let Greg make the
> final call. Not going to NACK for this point.

FWIW, kernel developers have to cope with enough trouble from "undefined
behavior" already; I don't think we should really be adding that to our
own docs.  We can certainly document the infinite loop behavior as being
not guaranteed as part of the API if we're worried that somebody might
start to rely on it...:)  

Thanks,

jon

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-03-28 17:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-27 17:01 [PATCH] Add documentation on meaning of -EPROBE_DEFER Grant Likely
2020-03-27 18:10 ` Saravana Kannan
2020-03-27 23:25   ` Grant Likely
2020-03-27 23:55     ` Saravana Kannan
2020-03-28 11:13       ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-03-28 17:03       ` Jonathan Corbet [this message]
2020-03-28 21:46         ` Saravana Kannan
2020-03-31 14:33 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-03-31 16:43   ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-03-31 17:03     ` Andy Shevchenko

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200328110351.4e50491e@lwn.net \
    --to=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=grant.likely@arm.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nd@arm.com \
    --cc=saravanak@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).