Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> The write operation to "sc->next_chan" is protected by >> the lock on line 1287, but the read operation to >> this data on line 1262 is not protected by the lock. >> Thus, there may exist a data race for "sc->next_chan". >> >> To fix this data race, the read operation to "sc->next_chan" >> should be also protected by the lock. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@xxxxxxxxx> > > I need this reviewed by someone else before I'm willing to take it. Only possible issue I can see is that it puts a call to getrawmonotonic() under the spinlock. Not sure if that has any bad implications... -Toke
