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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 6 Mar 2019 10:32:57 -0800
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
Subject: [GIT PULL] workqueue changes for v5.1-rc1

Hello, Linus.

All trivial.  Two comment updates and one more initialization sanity
check in flush_work().

Thanks.

The following changes since commit d73aba1115cf40630cc8b4b7aed049ed8117b458:

  Merge tag 'drm-fixes-2019-01-25-1' of git://anongit.freedesktop.org/drm/drm (2019-01-25 12:19:10 +1300)

are available in the Git repository at:

  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/wq.git for-5.1

for you to fetch changes up to bf393fd4a3c888e6d407968f461900481bd0c041:

  workqueue: Fix spelling in source code comments (2019-03-05 07:52:39 -0800)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bart Van Assche (1):
      workqueue: Fix spelling in source code comments

Liu Song (1):
      workqueue: fix typo in comment

Tetsuo Handa (1):
      workqueue: Try to catch flush_work() without INIT_WORK().

 kernel/workqueue.c | 9 ++++++---
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 392be4b252f6..1ef68ac89162 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -646,7 +646,7 @@ static void set_work_pool_and_clear_pending(struct work_struct *work,
 	 * The following mb guarantees that previous clear of a PENDING bit
 	 * will not be reordered with any speculative LOADS or STORES from
 	 * work->current_func, which is executed afterwards.  This possible
-	 * reordering can lead to a missed execution on attempt to qeueue
+	 * reordering can lead to a missed execution on attempt to queue
 	 * the same @work.  E.g. consider this case:
 	 *
 	 *   CPU#0                         CPU#1
@@ -1321,7 +1321,7 @@ static bool is_chained_work(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
 
 	worker = current_wq_worker();
 	/*
-	 * Return %true iff I'm a worker execuing a work item on @wq.  If
+	 * Return %true iff I'm a worker executing a work item on @wq.  If
 	 * I'm @worker, it's safe to dereference it without locking.
 	 */
 	return worker && worker->current_pwq->wq == wq;
@@ -1619,7 +1619,7 @@ static void rcu_work_rcufn(struct rcu_head *rcu)
  *
  * Return: %false if @rwork was already pending, %true otherwise.  Note
  * that a full RCU grace period is guaranteed only after a %true return.
- * While @rwork is guarnateed to be executed after a %false return, the
+ * While @rwork is guaranteed to be executed after a %false return, the
  * execution may happen before a full RCU grace period has passed.
  */
 bool queue_rcu_work(struct workqueue_struct *wq, struct rcu_work *rwork)
@@ -2908,6 +2908,9 @@ static bool __flush_work(struct work_struct *work, bool from_cancel)
 	if (WARN_ON(!wq_online))
 		return false;
 
+	if (WARN_ON(!work->func))
+		return false;
+
 	if (!from_cancel) {
 		lock_map_acquire(&work->lockdep_map);
 		lock_map_release(&work->lockdep_map);

Powered by blists - more mailing lists