From: Chen Gang Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/padata.c: always check the return value of __padata_remove_cpu() and __padata_add_cpu() Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:16:10 +0800 Message-ID: <5215ACAA.3020708@asianux.com> References: <5212E5E4.8010408@asianux.com> <5212E61F.7010602@asianux.com> <20130822051122.GB26773@secunet.com> <5215A134.90607@asianux.com> <20130822060503.GC26773@secunet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" To: Steffen Klassert Return-path: Received: from intranet.asianux.com ([58.214.24.6]:16113 "EHLO intranet.asianux.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753815Ab3HVHSj (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Aug 2013 03:18:39 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20130822060503.GC26773@secunet.com> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 08/22/2013 02:05 PM, Steffen Klassert wrote: > 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. > > Thanks, I will send patch v2 for it. -- Chen Gang