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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 09:41:32 +0530 From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> Cc: Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>, Arvind Chauhan <Arvind.Chauhan@....com>, Linaro Networking <linaro-networking@...aro.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 Resend 1/5] tick-common: fix wrong check in tick_check_replacement() On 16 April 2014 00:12, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote: > B1;3202;0c What does this mean ?? > On Tue, 15 Apr 2014, Viresh Kumar wrote: > >> tick_check_replacement() returns if a replacement of clock_event_device is >> possible or not. It does this as the first check: >> >> if (tick_check_percpu(curdev, newdev, smp_processor_id())) >> return false; >> >> This looks wrong as we are returning false when tick_check_percpu() returned >> true. Probably Thomas forgot '!' here in his commit: 03e13cf5e ? > > Come on. You can do better changelogs. :( > "This looks wrong" is definitely not a good description of the > problem. > > Either you know WHY it is wrong, then you say so. If not, then you can > send an RFC. > > I fixed the changelog up this time. Thanks, will take care of such stuff in future. -- 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