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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 13:11:42 -0700 From: mark gross <640e9920@...il.com> To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> Cc: Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@...a.org.au>, markgross@...gnar.org, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [patch] complain when users abuse the pm_qos API On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 09:50:01PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sunday 30 May 2010, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > Hi. > > > > On 30/05/10 06:08, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Saturday 29 May 2010, mark gross wrote: > > >> The following patch is to help clean up API abusers of pm_qos where > > >> they call update_request before registering a request. > > >> > > >> --mgross > > >> > > >> --Signed-off-by: markgross<markgross@...gnar.org> > > > > > > Will there be a big issue if I push this during the next merge window? > > > > What's the point to the patch? That is: why is calling update_request > > before registering a request such a big problem that it demands a WARN() > > and dump stack? > > It is an API violation if I understand that correctly. Yeah, it is, but now that I'm thinking clearly perhaps a better fix would be to change the prototype of pm_qos_update_request to return something so callers can check for success. Lets fix the API rather than use this patch. Please dopt apply it. --mgross -- 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