On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 8:48 PM, Luc Van Oostenryck
<luc.vanoostenryck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> + while (list->nr == 0)
>> + list = list->prev;
Yes, it can deed loop here when the whole list is empty.
> FOR_EACH_PTR_REVERSE(list, ptr) {
> DELETE_CURRENT_PTR(ptr);
> last = last_ptr_list((struct ptr_list *)list);
> } END_FOR_EACH_PTR_REVERSE(ptr);
> }
> loops forever on a list with 1 element with your patch.
> Without your patch, last_ptr_list() return an invalid pointer instead of NULL.
>
I can see what is going on now. The while loop should
check for the list->prev has been loop back to the tail of
the list.
Some thing like this should fix it, I haven't test it at all.
list = tail = list->prev;
while (list->nr == 0) {
list = list->prev;
if (list == tail)
return NULL;
}
Chris
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
