[ Once again, quilt fails the MIME coding ]
From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)" <[email protected]>
Before a timer is freed, timer_shutdown_sync() must be called.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
Cc: Sumit Semwal <[email protected]>
Cc: "Christian König" <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <[email protected]>
---
drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c b/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c
index fb6e0a6ae2c9..5d3e7b503501 100644
--- a/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c
+++ b/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c
@@ -412,7 +412,7 @@ static int test_wait_timeout(void *arg)
err = 0;
err_free:
- del_timer_sync(&wt.timer);
+ timer_shutdown_sync(&wt.timer);
destroy_timer_on_stack(&wt.timer);
dma_fence_signal(wt.f);
dma_fence_put(wt.f);
--
2.35.1
Am 04.11.22 um 06:54 schrieb Steven Rostedt:
> [ Once again, quilt fails the MIME coding ]
>
> From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)" <[email protected]>
>
> Before a timer is freed, timer_shutdown_sync() must be called.
>
> Link: https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flore.kernel.org%2Fall%2F20220407161745.7d6754b3%40gandalf.local.home%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7Ca18ff1d0a7e442a1283808dabe29148d%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C638031380931371691%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=XZgwOy0u20L1AxOjhUpWICodbSn2VYhh6YGSykjUegQ%3D&reserved=0
>
> Cc: Sumit Semwal <[email protected]>
> Cc: "Christian König" <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c b/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c
> index fb6e0a6ae2c9..5d3e7b503501 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c
> @@ -412,7 +412,7 @@ static int test_wait_timeout(void *arg)
>
> err = 0;
> err_free:
> - del_timer_sync(&wt.timer);
> + timer_shutdown_sync(&wt.timer);
Mhm, what exactly is the benefit of renaming the function?
Not that I'm against the change, but my thinking is more if there are
more functions which don't re-arm the time than those which do that then
why not forbid it in general?
Regards,
Christian.
> destroy_timer_on_stack(&wt.timer);
> dma_fence_signal(wt.f);
> dma_fence_put(wt.f);
On Fri, 4 Nov 2022 08:15:53 +0100
Christian König <[email protected]> wrote:
> > index fb6e0a6ae2c9..5d3e7b503501 100644
> > --- a/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c
> > +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c
> > @@ -412,7 +412,7 @@ static int test_wait_timeout(void *arg)
> >
> > err = 0;
> > err_free:
> > - del_timer_sync(&wt.timer);
> > + timer_shutdown_sync(&wt.timer);
>
> Mhm, what exactly is the benefit of renaming the function?
>
> Not that I'm against the change, but my thinking is more if there are
> more functions which don't re-arm the time than those which do that then
> why not forbid it in general?
Timers are more often re-armed then not. I had to look for the
locations where del_timer*() was called just before freeing, and other
locations where they are freed later.
I didn't rename del_timer_sync() to timer_shutdown_sync(), this version
renamed the new "del_timer_shutdown()" to "timer_shutdown_sync()".
Maybe I'm just confused at what you are asking.
-- Steve
Am 04.11.22 um 19:58 schrieb Steven Rostedt:
> On Fri, 4 Nov 2022 08:15:53 +0100
> Christian König <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> index fb6e0a6ae2c9..5d3e7b503501 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c
>>> @@ -412,7 +412,7 @@ static int test_wait_timeout(void *arg)
>>>
>>> err = 0;
>>> err_free:
>>> - del_timer_sync(&wt.timer);
>>> + timer_shutdown_sync(&wt.timer);
>> Mhm, what exactly is the benefit of renaming the function?
>>
>> Not that I'm against the change, but my thinking is more if there are
>> more functions which don't re-arm the time than those which do that then
>> why not forbid it in general?
> Timers are more often re-armed then not. I had to look for the
> locations where del_timer*() was called just before freeing, and other
> locations where they are freed later.
>
> I didn't rename del_timer_sync() to timer_shutdown_sync(), this version
> renamed the new "del_timer_shutdown()" to "timer_shutdown_sync()".
>
> Maybe I'm just confused at what you are asking.
No, that explains it a bit better. I was just wondering what exactly the
different to del_timer_sync() is.
Maybe shorten the summary in the cover letter a bit. The history how
this change came to be is not as interesting as why we are changing
something.
Regards,
Christian.
>
> -- Steve
> _______________________________________________
> Linaro-mm-sig mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]