netdev - Re: [PATCH 3/3] 3c59x: Use setup

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.20.1602281651160.17144@lianli.shorne-pla.net>
Date:	Sun, 28 Feb 2016 16:53:27 +0900 (JST)
From:	Stafford Horne <shorne@...il.com>
To:	Amitoj Kaur Chawla <amitoj1606@...il.com>
cc:	Stafford Horne <shorne@...il.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	klassert@...hematik.tu-chemnitz.de, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	"Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] 3c59x: Use setup_timer()



On Sun, 28 Feb 2016, Amitoj Kaur Chawla wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 12:18 AM, Stafford Horne <shorne@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 25 Feb 2016, David Miller wrote:
> >
> >> From: Amitoj Kaur Chawla <amitoj1606@...il.com>
> >> Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 19:28:19 +0530
> >>
> >>> Convert a call to init_timer and accompanying intializations of
> >>> the timer's data and function fields to a call to setup_timer.
> >>>
> >>> The Coccinelle semantic patch that fixes this problem is
> >>> as follows:
> >>>
> >>> // <smpl>
> >>> @@
> >>> expression t,f,d;
> >>> @@
> >>>
> >>> -init_timer(&t);
> >>> +setup_timer(&t,f,d);
> >>>  ...
> >>> -t.data = d;
> >>> -t.function = f;
> >>> // </smpl>
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Amitoj Kaur Chawla <amitoj1606@...il.com>
> >>
> >>
> >> Applied.
> >
> >
> > Hi David, Amitoj,
> >
> > The patch here seemed to remove the call to add_timer(&vp->timer) which
> > applies the expires time. Would that be an issue?
> >
> > -Stafford
> 
> I'm sorry. This is my mistake. How can I rectify it now that the patch
> is applied?
> 
> Should I send a patch adding it back?

I sent a patch just now which could help to restore the behavior.

This is applied on top of your patch which I pulled from Dave's
tree here:

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git

-Stafford