Re: [PATCH] unlock before bug returns

Rene Herman wrote:
> On 10/22/2007 02:40 PM, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> 
>> NAK. This will cause double-unlock when CONFIG_BUG is disabled. It's
>> incorrect to assume that BUG() will always terminate the current
>> process.
> 
> (which by the way also means that the "return;" delete from your
> original patch changes behaviour for !CONFIG_BUG, and probably not for
> the better).
> 
> Rene.

Thanks for your comments. A patch containing this suggestion is:

[PATCH retry] return hidden bug and unlock bugs.

Roel
-
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/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH] unlock before bug returns
    • From: Roel Kluin <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] unlock before bug returns
    • From: Roel Kluin <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] unlock before bug returns
    • From: Rik van Riel <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] unlock before bug returns
    • From: Roel Kluin <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] unlock before bug returns
    • From: "Pekka Enberg" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] unlock before bug returns
    • From: Rene Herman <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: ata_exec_internal crash at boot in -git22
• Next by Date: Re: [RFC/PATCH 3/3] rt: PI-workqueue: fix barriers
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] unlock before bug returns
• Next by thread: "spurious completions during NCQ" with 2.6.23.1 and DVD Multi-Recorder on Thinkpad T61
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]