linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpuset: Rework sched domains and CPU hotplug handling (take 4)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <b9df5fa10808120648x5bd541cdpd020cee836e89f20@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 12 Aug 2008 19:48:17 +0600
From:	"Rakib Mullick" <rakib.mullick@...il.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuset: Rework sched domains and CPU hotplug handling (take 4)

On 8/12/08, Rakib Mullick <rakib.mullick@...il.com> wrote:
> On 8/12/08, Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...lcomm.com> wrote:
>
> > Rakib Mullick wrote:
>  >  > One more thing Max, while you are allocating memory for "dattr"  I
>  >  > think it  needs to check that it is successful or not . I've shown it
>  >  > on one of my previous patch on 7th Aug.
>  >
>  >
>  > I think you missed this part of the patch
>  >
>  >
>  >  > +     /*
>  >  > +      * The rest of the code, including the scheduler, can deal with
>  >  > +      * dattr==NULL case. No need to abort if alloc fails.
>  >  > +      */
>  >  >       dattr = kmalloc(ndoms * sizeof(struct sched_domain_attr), GFP_KERNEL);
>  >
>  >
>  > I replied to your patch saying that we do not need to check it. And Paul
>  >  suggested to add a comment to explain why.
>
Ok, this is the second place. But, what about the first place ( I
 mean in line 614).
>  >
>  >
>  >  Max
>  >
>  >
>  >
>
--
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/