Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 2 Jun 2004 17:27:42 +0200 | From | Jörn Engel <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH] explicitly mark recursion count |
| |
On Wed, 2 June 2004 08:12:00 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, 2 Jun 2004, Jörn Engel wrote: > > > > Can I read this as: > > Linus himself will use strong words to enforce all recursions in the > > kernel to be either removed or properly documented. > > If we have a good detector that is reliable and easy to run, why not?
Great! So the official format to document recursions is plain english for human readers?
> It will take some time, but I think the problem so far has been that the > recursion can be hard to see. Some "core" cases are well-known (memory > allocations during memory allocation, and filename lookup), and they > should be trivial to annotate. Knock wood. Others might be worse.
For sure. There are some functions with multiple recursions around them, real fun! :)
> > In that case, you have 273 recursions to deal with. They are all in > > the data I attached a few posts back. Recursions would basically be > > in the same league as huge stack hogs, sounds good. > > Yes. And with huge stack hogs, we've not exactly "fixed them all in a > weekend", have we? But having a few people run the checking tools and > nagging every once in a while ends up eventually fixing things. At least > the most common ones.
s/a few people/Jörn/
Legal reasons. I'll try to do this from time to time.
Jörn
-- To recognize individual spam features you have to try to get into the mind of the spammer, and frankly I want to spend as little time inside the minds of spammers as possible. -- Paul Graham - 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/
| |