[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1369871306.22004.126.camel@joe-AO722>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 16:48:26 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] timer: Fix jiffies wrap behavior of round_jiffies*()
On Wed, 2013-05-29 at 16:38 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 29 May 2013 16:17:47 -0700 Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
>
> > > We could perhaps have a checkpatch rule
> > > which looks for comparisons against jiffes (and any other
> > > time-measuring variables we can detect)
> >
> > other variables like?
>
> Grepping for time_after finds a bunch. There's no real pattern to it though.
Yup, that's the problem.
Thought I'd ask what I was missing though.
No variable really stands out as testable other
than jiffies.
I added this to my local queue and I'll send it later.
# check for comparisons of jiffies
if ($line =~ /\bif\s*\((\s*jiffies\s*[\<\>]|.*[\<\>]=?\s*jiffies\b)/) {
WARN("JIFFIES_COMPARISON",
"Comparing jiffies is almost always wrong; prefer time_after, time_before and friends\n" . $herecurr);
}
--
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