[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070524052849.GA26967@in.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 10:58:49 +0530
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...ibm.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@...e.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix crash with irqpoll due to the IRQF_IRQPOLL flag
On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 09:01:04AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 22 May 2007, Bernhard Walle wrote:
> >
> > o System crashes if booted with irqpoll command line option.
> >
> > o Problem happens because Inside note_interrupt() we are accessing
> > desc->action->flag without taking the desc->lock. While accessing it
> > somebody goes ahead and unregisters the irq handler hence desc->action
> > is NULL. By the time note_interrupt() checks it, it crashes.
>
> I absolutely _detest_ patches that make already complex and unreadable
> code even more so. Especially conditionals. Please don't do that.
>
> If you need a variable for a conditional, make it be an implicit one from
> an inline function, and aim for making it readable.
>
> So how about instead writing it out as a nice self-explanatory inline
> function? I can almost guarantee that this generates no worse code, and it
> also makes it easy to explain things like "we don't bother with the lock,
> because we don't care enough".
>
> Untested, but I think the point of the patch is obvious. Anybody want to
> test it, send it back to me, and fix the bug while making the code more
> readable?
>
Hi Linus,
I tested it. It works fine. And yes, this patch is more readable.
Thanks
Vivek
-
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