[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081028152943.GA20989@x200.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 18:29:43 +0300
From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To: torvalds@...l.org, akpm@...l.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: On spreading atomic_t initialization
I wrote stupid runtime checker to look for atomic_t uninitialized usage
and the amount of screaming in logs is surprisingly very big.
So the question: is there really really an arch for which setting atomic_t
by hand (kzalloc) is not equivalent to atomic_set()?
Given the following patch, there is none almost certainly.
--- a/kernel/user.c
+++ b/kernel/user.c
@@ -405,6 +405,9 @@ struct user_struct *alloc_uid(struct user_namespace *ns, uid_t uid)
new->uid = uid;
atomic_set(&new->__count, 1);
+ atomic_set(&new->processes, 0);
+ atomic_set(&new->files, 0);
+ atomic_set(&new->sigpending, 0);
if (sched_create_user(new) < 0)
goto out_free_user;
Such checker will still be useful to catch genuine uninitialized usages,
but the amount of stuff to shut up before it can realistically be put in -mm
is amazing.
--
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