linux-kernel - Re: [patch 06/15] timers: Update kernel-doc for various functions

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 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <8735abgcty.ffs@tglx>
Date:   Tue, 22 Nov 2022 17:42:49 +0100
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...ia.fr>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
        Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@...il.com>,
        Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@...il.com>,
        linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Subject: Re: [patch 06/15] timers: Update kernel-doc for various functions

On Tue, Nov 22 2022 at 10:41, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> On Tue, 22 Nov 2022 16:18:37 +0100
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
>> >> + * This function cannot guarantee that the timer cannot be rearmed right
>> >> + * after dropping the base lock. That needs to be prevented by the calling
>> >> + * code if necessary.  
>> >
>
> Also, re-reading it again, I wounder if we can avoid the double use of
> "cannot", in "cannot guarantee that the timer cannot".
>
> What about:
>
>     This function does not prevent the timer from being rearmed right after
>     dropping the base lock.

Funny enough I noticed myself when I copied this sentence into the code
and did exactly the same change :)