[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5930BCD6.9010306@163.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2017 09:18:14 +0800
From: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@....com>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
CC: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>, kvalo@...eaurora.org,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, b43-dev@...ts.infradead.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] b43legacy: Fix a sleep-in-atomic bug in b43legacy_attr_interfmode_store
On 06/02/2017 12:11 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Jun 2017 09:05:07 +0800
> Jia-Ju Bai<baijiaju1990@....com> wrote:
>
>> I admit my patches are not well tested, and they may not well fix the bugs.
>> I am looking forward to opinions and suggestions :)
> May I politely suggest that sending out untested locking changes is a
> dangerous thing to do? You really should not be changing the locking in a
> piece of kernel code without understanding very well what the lock is
> protecting and being able to say why your changes are safe. Without that,
> the risk of introducing subtle bugs is very high.
>
> It looks like you have written a useful tool that could help us to make
> the kernel more robust. If you are interested in my suggestion, I would
> recommend that you post the sleep-in-atomic scenarios that you are
> finding, but refrain from "fixing" them in any case where you cannot offer
> a strong explanation of why your fix is correct.
>
> Thanks for working to find bugs in the kernel!
>
> jon
Hi,
Thanks for your good and helpful advice. I am sorry for my improper patches.
I will only report bugs instead of sending improper patches when I have
no good solution of fixing the bugs.
Thanks,
Jia-Ju Bai
Powered by blists - more mailing lists