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  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:   Wed, 22 Feb 2017 21:06:23 +0100
From:   Harald Geyer <>
To:     Mark Brown <>
cc:     Liam Girdwood <>, Tejun Heo <>,
        Lai Jiangshan <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] workqueue: Add new function mod_fwd_delayed_work()

Mark Brown writes:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 05:41:24PM +0000, Harald Geyer wrote:
> > Drivers calling queue_delayed_work() or mod_delayed_work() multiple times
> > on the same work without coordination get undefined behaviour. Add a new
> > function, which is easier to use.
> The obvious question here, especially in the case of mod_delayed_work(),
> is why not fix the existing functions to have the expected behaviour?

AFAICS the existing functions behave as documented. I don't feel to be an
authority to decide that the documented behaviour is not right. Actually
I think that what mod_delayed_work() does, is a valid operation, even
if many current users probably don't want it.

I guess many users don't care, because they are calling mod_delayed_work()
from only a single place with a constant delay. However reviewing all
107 use cases in 58 files to check if we can safely change the
behaviour, would be quite a lot of work.

I was suprised when I found that no function like mod_fwd_delayed_work()
existed, so you have a point there.

If you want to support my work:
or donate via CLAM to xASPBtezLNqj4cUe8MT5nZjthRSEjrRQXN
or via peercoin to P98LRdhit3gZbHDBe7ta5jtXrMJUms4p7w

Powered by blists - more mailing lists