linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [Watchdog][Trivial] Added comments to explain watchdog

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]

Date:	Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:21:01 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	anish singh <anish198519851985@...il.com>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, dzickus@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
	chuansheng.liu@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [Watchdog][Trivial] Added comments to explain
 watchdog_disabled variable


* anish singh <anish198519851985@...il.com> wrote:

> Is the below patch picked up?
> 
> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 9:31 PM, anish kumar <anish198519851985@...il.com> wrote:
> > From: anish kumar <anish198519851985@...il.com>
> >
> > This watchdog_disabled flag is bit of cryptic.Howerver it's usefullnes is multifold.
> > Uses are:
> > 1. Check if smpboot_register_percpu_thread function passed.
> > 2. Makes sure that user enables and disables the watchdog in sequence
> >    i.e. enable watchdog->disable watchdog->enable watchdog
> >    Unlike enable watchdog->enable watchdog which is wrong.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: anish kumar <anish198519851985@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  kernel/watchdog.c |    5 +++++
> >  1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
> > index 75a2ab3..87a19aa 100644
> > --- a/kernel/watchdog.c
> > +++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
> > @@ -518,6 +518,11 @@ int proc_dowatchdog(struct ctl_table *table, int write,
> >                 return ret;
> >
> >         set_sample_period();
> > +       /*
> > +        * We shouldn't enable watchdog threads if it is
> > +        * disabled.This is done by watchdog_disabled
> > +        * variable check in watchdog_*_all_cpus function.

It has two grammatic and a stylistic error in it, plus misses 
the convention that function names are mentioned with a '()'.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/