| 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: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 11:41:18 +0200 From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com> CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] workqueue: mark lock acquisition on worker_maybe_bind_and_lock() On 08/22/2010 04:19 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote: > worker_maybe_bind_and_lock() actually grabs gcwq->lock but was missing proper > annotation. Add it. So this patch will remove following sparse warnings: > > kernel/workqueue.c:1214:13: warning: context imbalance in 'worker_maybe_bind_and_lock' - wrong count at exit > arch/x86/include/asm/irqflags.h:44:9: warning: context imbalance in 'worker_rebind_fn' - unexpected unlock > kernel/workqueue.c:1991:17: warning: context imbalance in 'rescuer_thread' - unexpected unlock > > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com> applied to wq#for-linus. Thanks. Also, please considering putting related patches into a thread. For short series, just chaining them is good enough (ie. patch n+1 is reply to patch n). For longer series, writing up a head message with overall description, diffstat and other general info about the patch series and making all patches reaplies to the head message is a good idea. Thanks. -- tejun -- 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