[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191220201314.GS2827@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 21:13:14 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rxrpc: struct mutex cannot be used for
rxrpc_call::user_mutex
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 09:44:17AM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2019, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > Automate what exactly?
>
> What I meant was automating finding cases that are 'false positives' such
> as rxrpc and kexec _before_ re-adding the warn.
I suppose we can keep the WARN patch in a -next enabled branch for a
while, without it nessecarily going into linus' tree on the next
release.
That does require people actually testing -next, which seems somewhat
optimistic.
Alternatively, you can try your hand at smatch ...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists