linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/25] sja1000: don't use [delayed_]work

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-Id: <20121222.000111.1132195626602429566.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sat, 22 Dec 2012 00:01:11 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	tj@...nel.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, wg@...ndegger.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/25] sja1000: don't use [delayed_]work_pending()

From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 17:56:53 -0800

> There's no need to test whether a (delayed) work item in pending
> before queueing, flushing or cancelling it.  Most uses are unnecessary
> and quite a few of them are buggy.
> 
> Remove unnecessary pending tests from sja1000.  Only compile tested.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> Cc: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>
> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
> ---
> Please let me know how this patch should be routed.  I can take it
> through the workqueue tree if necessary.

I would suggest just taking it via the workqueue tree, 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/