From: Steffen Klassert Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/padata.c: always check the return value of __padata_remove_cpu() and __padata_add_cpu() Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 08:05:03 +0200 Message-ID: <20130822060503.GC26773@secunet.com> References: <5212E5E4.8010408@asianux.com> <5212E61F.7010602@asianux.com> <20130822051122.GB26773@secunet.com> <5215A134.90607@asianux.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" To: Chen Gang Return-path: Received: from a.mx.secunet.com ([195.81.216.161]:42152 "EHLO a.mx.secunet.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753059Ab3HVGFG (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Aug 2013 02:05:06 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5215A134.90607@asianux.com> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 01:27:16PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote: > On 08/22/2013 01:11 PM, Steffen Klassert wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:44:31AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote: > >> > >> If this patch is correct, better to let CPU_ONLINE and CPU_DOWN_FAILED > >> share the same code. > >> > >> And do we need a comment "/* fall through */" between CPU_UP_CANCELED > >> and CPU_DOWN_FAILED (or it is another bug, need a 'break' statement) ? > >> > >> At last, also better to let CPU_DOWN_PREPARE and CPU_UP_CANCELED share > >> the same code (if need a 'break'), or share the most of code (if "fall > >> through"). > >> > > > > CPU_ONLINE and CPU_DOWN_FAILED can share the code. Same is true for > > CPU_DOWN_PREPARE and CPU_UP_CANCELED. > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > Thank you too. > > And need I send another patch for it ? > > Or just make by yourself (and better to mark me as Reported-by). :-) > You found the problem, feel free to send a patch.