[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 10:59:23 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety
* Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 12:22:44PM +0000, David Howells wrote:
> > Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> >
> > > the question is: which is more important, the type safety of a
> > > container_of() [or type cast], which if we get it wrong produces a
> > > /very/ trivial crash that is trivial to fix
>
> The hell it is. You get wrong fields of a big struct read and
> modified. Silently.
yeah - i think you are right. I think we should go with your changes to
incrase type safety for timer callbacks - and if someone wants to shrink
size (which patches do not exist at the moment), that person can think
about how to achieve that while still keeping type safety.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists