lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] tty/n_hdlc: fix sleep in !TASK_RUNNING state warning
From
Date
On 2019/01/04 0:57, Paul Fulghum wrote:
>> On Jan 3, 2019, at 3:32 AM, Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> wrote:
>>
>> On 2019/01/03 18:09, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>>> On 02. 01. 19, 16:04, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>>>> + if (wait_event_interruptible(tty->read_wait,
>>>> + (ret = -EIO, test_bit(TTY_OTHER_CLOSED, &tty->flags)) ||
>>>> + (ret = 0, tty_hung_up_p(file)) ||
>>>> + (rbuf = n_hdlc_buf_get(&n_hdlc->rx_buf_list)) != NULL ||
>>>> + (ret = -EAGAIN, tty_io_nonblock(tty, file))))
>>>> + return -EINTR;
>>>
>>> Oh, that looks really ugly. Could you move all this to a function
>>> returning a bool and taking &ret and &rbuf as parameters?
>>>
>>
>> OK. Something like this?
>
>
> I agree with Jiri that placing all the conditional logic in a single expression is difficult to read.
>
> But exchanging that many locals with a separate function defeats the original purpose of
> simplifying code and this implementation changes the logic (write no
> longer checks for line discipline changing under it during wait).

Not only defeating the original purpose but also increasing object size.

>
> Converting to wait_event_interruptible where possible is a good goal but this instance
> may be better left alone. The current structure mirrors the existing n_tty line discipline.

But why not to clarify what are appropriate sanity checks?

Currently, read side does not check "n_hdlc->magic != HDLC_MAGIC" case
while write side does. If it is intended for catching memory corruption
etc. then both sides should do the same thing.

Currently, write side does not check "tty != n_hdlc->tty" case before
schedule() while does after schedule(). If "tty != n_hdlc->tty" case
can ever happen, what prevents n_hdlc_tty_write() from being called again
after n_hdlc_tty_write() once returned with -EIO due to "tty != n_hdlc->tty"
case? If it is intended for catching memory corruption etc. then both
sides should check "tty != n_hdlc->tty" case.

Current logic is unclear, in addition to want a cleanup for scripts/checkpatch.pl .

total: 158 errors, 95 warnings, 994 lines checked

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-04 11:24    [W:0.109 / U:0.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site