On Wed, 23 May 2007, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>
> Yes, that looks better, thanks.
There appear to be other obvious problems in the recent "cleanups" in this
area..
Look at
psched_tdiff_bounded(psched_time_t tv1, psched_time_t tv2, psched_time_t bound)
{
return min(tv1 - tv2, bound);
}
and compare it to the previous code:
#define PSCHED_TDIFF_SAFE(tv1, tv2, bound) \
min_t(long long, (tv1) - (tv2), bound)
and ponder how that "trivial cleanup" totally broke the thing.
Hint: "psched_time_t" is an "u64". What does that mean for
min(tv1 - tv2, bound);
again, when "tv2" is larger than tv1. It _used_ to return a negative
value. Now it returns a positive "bound" upper bound, because "tv1-tv2"
will be used as a huge unsigned (and thus _positive_) integer. And was
that accidental, or done on purpose?
Sounds accidental to me, since you then want to return a "psched_tdiff_t",
which is typedeffed to be "long".
Doesn't sound very safe to me, especially since the commit message for
this is "[NET_SCHED]: turn PSCHED_TDIFF_SAFE into inline function", and
there's no indication that anybody realized that it changed semantics in
the process.
Hmm? What _should_ that thing do?
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
