Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 3 Sep 2009 09:16:46 +0300 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/5] kmemleak: fix sparse warning over overshadowed flags | From | Pekka Enberg <> |
| |
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 4:40 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez<lrodriguez@atheros.com> wrote: > This fixes this sparse warning: > mm/kmemleak.c:512:31: warning: symbol 'flags' shadows an earlier one > mm/kmemleak.c:448:23: originally declared here > > Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <lrodriguez@atheros.com> > --- > mm/kmemleak.c | 6 +++--- > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/kmemleak.c b/mm/kmemleak.c > index 7bb1d48..09ddf9c 100644 > --- a/mm/kmemleak.c > +++ b/mm/kmemleak.c > @@ -509,14 +509,14 @@ static void create_object(unsigned long ptr, size_t size, int min_count, > * random memory blocks. > */ > if (node != &object->tree_node) { > - unsigned long flags; > + unsigned long flags_object; > > kmemleak_stop("Cannot insert 0x%lx into the object search tree " > "(already existing)\n", ptr); > object = lookup_object(ptr, 1); > - spin_lock_irqsave(&object->lock, flags); > + spin_lock_irqsave(&object->lock, flags_object); > dump_object_info(object); > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&object->lock, flags); > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&object->lock, flags_object);
Catalin, why do we have nested "irqsave" in this function? Can't we just make these two spin_lock() and spin_unlock()?
> > goto out; > } > -- > 1.6.3.3 > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |