linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH git latest] drivers/scsi: fixing wrong comment before new_buffer

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]

Date:	Fri, 26 Sep 2008 11:13:00 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Lin Tan <tammy000@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH git latest] drivers/scsi: fixing wrong comment before
 new_buffer_tape()

On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:49:48 -0500
Lin Tan <tammy000@...il.com> wrote:

> (I would wish to be personally CC'ed the answers/comments posted to the list in response to my posting.)
> 
> ---
> 
> Removing the wrong comment.
> The lock is needed before calling new_tape_buffer(), at least in some cases.
> So the comment above new_tape_buffer() is inconsistent with the code and
> may mislead developers.
> 
> I simply removed the wrong comment, as I am not sure if the lock is required
> in all situations. If so, we should add "Caller must hold os_scsi_tapes_lock".
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lin Tan <tammy000@...il.com>

Looks true to me for the current versions of the code. In fact it is only
ever called from the initialisation function that I can see so chunks of
the code could simply go away as well as bits of the comment. Ditto the
one in drivers/scsi/st.c

Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@...hat.com>

--
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/