[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210251300140.17938@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 13:04:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irq: tsk->comm is an array
On Thu, 25 Oct 2012, Alan Cox wrote:
> From: Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>
>
> More relevantly what about termination and locks ?
>
The string is always properly terminated with a trailing zero no matter
how it is written. For threads other than current, the locking is
task_lock(task); for current, there are hundreds of places without locking
and it is generally considered acceptable for a race to print a mangled
string from a concurrent write to /proc/pid/comm.
> Anyway the array check is useless so remove it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>
> kernel/irq/manage.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/irq/manage.c b/kernel/irq/manage.c
> index 4c69326..ea39714 100644
> --- a/kernel/irq/manage.c
> +++ b/kernel/irq/manage.c
> @@ -792,8 +792,9 @@ static void irq_thread_dtor(struct callback_head *unused)
>
> action = kthread_data(tsk);
>
> + /* FIXME: locking */
> pr_err("exiting task \"%s\" (%d) is an active IRQ thread (irq %d)\n",
> - tsk->comm ? tsk->comm : "", tsk->pid, action->irq);
> + tsk->comm, tsk->pid, action->irq);
Ack without the comment, no locking necessary.
>
>
> desc = irq_to_desc(action->irq);
--
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