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:	Mon, 14 Jul 2014 10:30:11 +0800
From:	Lai Jiangshan <>
To:	Tejun Heo <>
CC:	<>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] workqueue: remove the first check and the return
 value of maybe_create_worker()

On 07/11/2014 11:03 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 12:01:03AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> @@ -1887,17 +1887,11 @@ static void pool_mayday_timeout(unsigned long __pool)
>>   * spin_lock_irq(pool->lock) which may be released and regrabbed
>>   * multiple times.  Does GFP_KERNEL allocations.  Called only from
>>   * manager.
>> - *
>> - * Return:
>> - * %false if no action was taken and pool->lock stayed locked, %true
>> - * otherwise.
>>   */
>> -static bool maybe_create_worker(struct worker_pool *pool)
>> +static void maybe_create_worker(struct worker_pool *pool)
> We probably should drop "maybe_" from the function name?

We already have create_worker(). And maybe_create_worker() does not always create worker.
maybe_create_worker() may not create worker if the condition is changed after
it fails at the first time, 
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists