Re: [PATCH v2 12/12] reboot: use devm_blocking_notifier_chain_register()

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 <[email protected]>

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/[email protected]?part=12