On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 04:24:36PM -0800, Zach Brown wrote:
> > -   int                     i = 0;
> > +   DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
> > +   struct hrtimer_sleeper t;
> > +   size_t i = 0;
> 
> Changing i to size_t is kind of surprising.  Is that on purpose?

I doubt it matters due to limits on ringbuffer size elsewhere but size_t
is more correct, since we're counting objects in an array.

> > -           set_task_state(tsk, TASK_RUNNING);
> > -           remove_wait_queue(&ctx->wait, &wait);
> > -
> >             if (unlikely(ret <= 0))
> >                     break;
> >  
> > @@ -879,11 +844,10 @@ static int read_events(struct kioctx *ctx,
> >             event ++;
> >             i ++;
> >     }
> > -
> > -   if (timeout)
> > -           clear_timeout(&to);
> >  out:
> > -   destroy_timer_on_stack(&to.timer);
> > +   hrtimer_cancel(&t.timer);
> > +   destroy_hrtimer_on_stack(&t.timer);
> > +   finish_wait(&ctx->wait, &wait);
> 
> I'd move the finish_wait() up to where TASK_RUNNING was set previously
> so that we can't call copy_to_user() while still set to
> TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE.

Slightly less efficient, but yeah that's more correct and this code all
changes later anyways.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
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