On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 11:49:04PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Andreea Bernat wrote:
>
> > Looks good to me.
>
> Can I put that down as a Reviewed-by?
Yes, it is OK.
Regards,
Andreea
>
> Thanks,
> David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body
Andreea Bernat wrote:
> Looks good to me.
Can I put that down as a Reviewed-by?
Thanks,
David
--
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
Pleas
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 12:32:31PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Andreea-Cristina Bernat wrote:
>
> > * The function "assoc_array_gc()" could be preempted between the call to
> > "assoc_array_apply_edit()" call and the assignment
> > "edit->array->nr_leaves_on_tree = nr_leaves_on_tree;", so the g
Andreea-Cristina Bernat wrote:
> * The function "assoc_array_gc()" could be preempted between the call to
> "assoc_array_apply_edit()" call and the assignment
> "edit->array->nr_leaves_on_tree = nr_leaves_on_tree;", so the grace
> period could complete.
The bug is real, but this patch isn't the
* The function "assoc_array_apply_edit()" passes "edit->rcu" to "call_rcu()".
* "assoc_array_apply_edit()'s" callers do not call it under an RCU
read-side critical section.
* The function "assoc_array_gc()" could be preempted between the call to
"assoc_array_apply_edit()" call and the assignment
"e
5 matches
Mail list logo