linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] workqueue: Fix manage

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 16 Aug 2013 10:46:12 -0400
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Libin <huawei.libin@...wei.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, guohanjun@...wei.com,
	wangyijing@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] workqueue: Fix manage_workers() RETURNS description

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 01:33:35PM +0800, Libin wrote:
> @@ -2033,8 +2033,8 @@ static bool maybe_destroy_workers(struct worker_pool *pool)
>   * multiple times.  Does GFP_KERNEL allocations.
>   *
>   * RETURNS:
> - * spin_lock_irq(pool->lock) which may be released and regrabbed
> - * multiple times.  Does GFP_KERNEL allocations.
> + * %false if the poll don't need management and the caller can safely 
                    ^
		    typo

> + * start processing works, %true otherwise.

So, %true indicates that the function released pool->lock and
reacquired it to perform some management function and that the
conditions that the caller verified while holding the lock before
calling the function might no longer be true.

Can you please update the patch accordingly?

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/