[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20131024.135614.1725589105857635534.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 13:56:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: David.Laight@...LAB.COM
Cc: vfalico@...hat.com, nikolay@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] netconsole: fix NULL pointer dereference
From: "David Laight" <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 11:39:02 +0100
>> >Taking the spinlock seems like the cleanest way to insure there's noone
>> >running in parallel, but I'm open to suggestions as I'm not satisfied with
>> >the looks of this. I'll prepare a net-next patchset for netconsole soon to
>> >clean it up properly, all of these can be easily simplified.
>>
>> First when I've seen 'spin_lock(); a = 1; spin_unlock()' I've thought
>> "WTF?", however indeed it will stop us racing with write_msg().
>
> Ditto - might be worth saying:
> /* Acquire lock to wait for any write_msg() to complete. */
Something this subtle definitely requires a comment.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists