linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/5] kmemleak: fix sparse warning over overshadowed flags

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

Message-ID: <84144f020909022316gbbe1e5dt8a61d5a6b8499b9b@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 3 Sep 2009 09:16:46 +0300
From:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <lrodriguez@...eros.com>
Cc:	catalin.marinas@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] kmemleak: fix sparse warning over overshadowed flags

On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 4:40 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez<lrodriguez@...eros.com> wrote:
> This fixes this sparse warning:
> mm/kmemleak.c:512:31: warning: symbol 'flags' shadows an earlier one
> mm/kmemleak.c:448:23: originally declared here
>
> Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <lrodriguez@...eros.com>
> ---
>  mm/kmemleak.c |    6 +++---
>  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/kmemleak.c b/mm/kmemleak.c
> index 7bb1d48..09ddf9c 100644
> --- a/mm/kmemleak.c
> +++ b/mm/kmemleak.c
> @@ -509,14 +509,14 @@ static void create_object(unsigned long ptr, size_t size, int min_count,
>         * random memory blocks.
>         */
>        if (node != &object->tree_node) {
> -               unsigned long flags;
> +               unsigned long flags_object;
>
>                kmemleak_stop("Cannot insert 0x%lx into the object search tree "
>                              "(already existing)\n", ptr);
>                object = lookup_object(ptr, 1);
> -               spin_lock_irqsave(&object->lock, flags);
> +               spin_lock_irqsave(&object->lock, flags_object);
>                dump_object_info(object);
> -               spin_unlock_irqrestore(&object->lock, flags);
> +               spin_unlock_irqrestore(&object->lock, flags_object);

Catalin, why do we have nested "irqsave" in this function? Can't we
just make these two spin_lock() and spin_unlock()?

>
>                goto out;
>        }
> --
> 1.6.3.3
>
> --
> 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/
>
--
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/