Hi Vaishali, On Sat, Jun 06, 2015 at 09:52:34AM +0530, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
> Use mod_timer instead of del_timer followed by add_timer to update > the expire field of the active timer. > > The semantic patch that performs this transformation is as follows: > > @change@ > expression e1, e2, e3, e4; > @@ > > - del_timer(&e1); > ... when != e1 = e3 > - e1.expires = e2; > ... when != e1 = e4 > - add_timer (&e1); > + mod_timer (&e1, e2); This isn't quite right. All the instances of this pattern in the ROSE stack also modify the timer's data and function fields which if the timer is still running and expiring while being fiddled with, might result in a race condition, that is the old function but new data field being used in combination or something like that. For some of the timers (maybe all?) it should be possible to proof that always the same values for data and function are being used. These initializations could then be used elsewhere and the code could then indeed be switched to mod_timer. Ralf -- 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/
