linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dmatest: properly handle duplicate DMA channels

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20080918174821.52b85b8b@hskinnemo-gx745.norway.atmel.com>
Date:	Thu, 18 Sep 2008 17:48:21 +0200
From:	Haavard Skinnemoen <haavard.skinnemoen@...el.com>
To:	Timur Tabi <timur@...escale.com>
Cc:	dan.j.williams@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dmatest: properly handle duplicate DMA channels

Timur Tabi <timur@...escale.com> wrote:
> Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> 
> > ...though I don't really see why you have to use
> > list_for_entry_safe()...  
> 
> You use it in dmatest_remove_channel(), so I figured I'd do the same thing.

dmatest_remove_channel() may call list_del() on the current entry, so it
has to. As long as you're not altering the list, the _safe() variant
shouldn't be necessary.

Haavard
--
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/