Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 12/33] timers: dma-buf: Use timer_shutdown_sync() before freeing timer

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Am 04.11.22 um 19:58 schrieb Steven Rostedt:
On Fri, 4 Nov 2022 08:15:53 +0100
Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> wrote:

index fb6e0a6ae2c9..5d3e7b503501 100644
--- a/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c
+++ b/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c
@@ -412,7 +412,7 @@ static int test_wait_timeout(void *arg)
err = 0;
   err_free:
-	del_timer_sync(&wt.timer);
+	timer_shutdown_sync(&wt.timer);
Mhm, what exactly is the benefit of renaming the function?

Not that I'm against the change, but my thinking is more if there are
more functions which don't re-arm the time than those which do that then
why not forbid it in general?
Timers are more often re-armed then not. I had to look for the
locations where del_timer*() was called just before freeing, and other
locations where they are freed later.

I didn't rename del_timer_sync() to timer_shutdown_sync(), this version
renamed the new "del_timer_shutdown()" to "timer_shutdown_sync()".

Maybe I'm just confused at what you are asking.

No, that explains it a bit better. I was just wondering what exactly the different to del_timer_sync() is.

Maybe shorten the summary in the cover letter a bit. The history how this change came to be is not as interesting as why we are changing something.

Regards,
Christian.


-- Steve
_______________________________________________
Linaro-mm-sig mailing list -- linaro-mm-sig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to linaro-mm-sig-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Linux DRI Users]     [Linux Intel Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux