netdev - Re: [PATCH 03/25] sja1000: don't use [delayed_]work

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 28 Dec 2012 16:40:52 -0500
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, wg@...ndegger.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/25] sja1000: don't use [delayed_]work_pending()

On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 12:01:11AM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 17:56:53 -0800
> 
> > There's no need to test whether a (delayed) work item in pending
> > before queueing, flushing or cancelling it.  Most uses are unnecessary
> > and quite a few of them are buggy.
> > 
> > Remove unnecessary pending tests from sja1000.  Only compile tested.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> > Cc: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>
> > Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
> > Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
> > ---
> > Please let me know how this patch should be routed.  I can take it
> > through the workqueue tree if necessary.
> 
> I would suggest just taking it via the workqueue tree, thanks Tejun.

Applied to wq/for-3.9-cleanups w/ your Acked-by added.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html