lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jan]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] [PATCH 2.6.37-rc5-tip 8/20] 8: uprobes: mmap and fork hooks.
* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> [2011-01-27 12:03:57]:

> On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 14:36 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
>
> > > Not to mention that p is uninitialized. Did this code ever work?
> >
> > I think the original patch that I sent had p initialized. I think it got
> > dropped off by Peter when he replied. Please do confirm.
>
>
> > +static void search_within_subtree(struct rb_node *n, struct inode *inode,
> > + struct list_head *tmp_list)
> > +{
> > + struct rb_node *p;
> > +
> > + if (p)
> > + __search_within_subtree(p, inode, tmp_list);
> > +
> > + p = n->rb_right;
> > + if (p)
> > + __search_within_subtree(p, inode, tmp_list);
> > +}
> > +
> >
> The above is from the original patch. 'p' does not look initialized to
> me.
>

> -- Steve
>
>

Here is the extract from the original patch at
https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/12/16/74 that I sent to LKML and I dont see
p being uninitialized.

+
+static void search_within_subtree(struct rb_node *n, struct inode *inode,
+ struct list_head *tmp_list)
+{
+ struct rb_node *p;
+
+ p = n->rb_left;
+ if (p)
+ __search_within_subtree(p, inode, tmp_list);
+
+ p = n->rb_right;
+ if (p)
+ __search_within_subtree(p, inode, tmp_list);
+}
+

However I have already agreed to remove this recursion and replace it
with a rb_next() logic.

--
Thanks and Regards
Srikar


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-01-28 06:03    [W:0.107 / U:8.332 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site