[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20140227141205.257c6dc9ab6da4fc11ee97ce@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 14:12:05 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: Regression with wait_event_timeout in next-20140226
Hi Peter,
On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 17:50:43 +0100 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 05:35:19PM +0100, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> >
> > while testing next-20140226 I got an issue with the function
> > wait_event_timeout. When this function timed out instead of returning
> > 0, it returned the value of the timeout passed in parameter. I found
> > that reverting "sched/wait: Suppress Sparse 'variable shadowing'
> > warning" fixed this regression.
> >
> > I got this issue in the driver drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c.
>
> Ah indeed. We actually rely on the shadowing for ___wait_cond_timeout().
>
> We further used the __ret variable in __wait_event_timeout()'s cmd
> argument: __ret = schedule_timeout(__ret). That now explicitly uses the
> wrong __ret.
>
> Yeah, we need to pull that patch.
I have reverted that commit from linux-next for today pending some other
resolution.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@...b.auug.org.au
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists