On 02/14, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote: > > Basically if you call wait_for_completion_timeout and the timeout condition > occures you always need some way of notifying the completing end that it > should no longer call complete()/complete_all().
Sure. "struct completion" doesn't differ from any other object when it comes to use-after-free. > > OK, perhaps you can ack the fix I sent? > > the only question I still have is that there would be no matching > smp_wmb() to the smp_rmb() you are using (atleast I did not figure out where). You seem to assume that every rmb() must be paired with wmb(). This is not always true. But as for completion_done(), its rmb() pairs with "release" semantics of complete()->spin_unlock(), which is a "one way" barrier. Oleg. -- 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/
