[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1323695116.13285.14.camel@twins>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 14:05:16 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip] sched/trivial: Remove cfs bandwidth period check in
tg_set_cfs_period()
On Sat, 2011-12-10 at 19:29 +0530, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> sched: Remove cfs bandwidth period check in tg_set_cfs_period()
>
> Remove cfs bandwidth period check from tg_set_cfs_period.
> Invalid bandwidth period's lower/upper limits are denoted
> by min_cfs_quota_period/max_cfs_quota_period repsectively,
> and are checked against valid period in tg_set_cfs_bandwidth().
>
> Signed-off-by: Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> --
> kernel/sched/core.c | 3 ---
> 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index 3c5b21e..57cf3ab 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -7689,9 +7689,6 @@ int tg_set_cfs_period(struct task_group *tg, long cfs_period_us)
> period = (u64)cfs_period_us * NSEC_PER_USEC;
> quota = tg->cfs_bandwidth.quota;
>
> - if (period <= 0)
> - return -EINVAL;
> -
> return tg_set_cfs_bandwidth(tg, period, quota);
> }
There's a number of funnies here... it checks an unsigned value for <=
0, which suggests it wanted to check cfs_period_us, which is a signed
value.
tg_set_cfs_bandwidth() has the same problem, at that point everything is
unsigned and all below zero checks will fail.
Please reconsider things and see if this patch is still the right one.
--
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