On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

> >  struct timerfd_ctx {
> >     struct hrtimer tmr;
> > +   int clockid;
> >     ktime_t tintv;
> >     wait_queue_head_t wqh;
> >     int expired;
> > +   u64 ticks;
> >  };
> 
> Can you please restructure the struct in a way which does not result in
> padding by the compiler ?
> 
> struct timerfd_ctx {
>       struct hrtimer tmr;
>       ktime_t tintv;
>       wait_queue_head_t wqh;
>       u64 ticks;
>       int expired;
>       int clockid;
> };

Sure.



> > +                   ticks += (u64)
> >                             hrtimer_forward(&ctx->tmr,
> >                                             hrtimer_cb_get_time(&ctx->tmr),
> 
> You need to use ctx->tmr.base->get_time() here, otherwise you might read
> a stale time value (in case that CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS is off).

Is the particular position of hrtimer_cb_get_time() in the code that would 
break here? Because function was added by your patch ;)
Did something change later?



> > +err_kfree_ctx:
> > +   kfree(ctx);
> > +   return error;
> 
> You really can avoid the goto here.

Ack.



- Davide


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to