From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthias Kaehlcke Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] platform/chrome: cros_ec_spi: Transfer messages at high priority Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2019 11:30:10 -0700 Message-ID: <20190403183010.GR112750@google.com> References: <20190403160526.257088-1-dianders@chromium.org> <20190403181415.GQ112750@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Doug Anderson Cc: Brian Norris , Benson Leung , Enric Balletbo i Serra , Alexandru M Stan , "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." , Simon Glass , Guenter Roeck , Mark Brown , Ryan Case , Randall Spangler , Heiko Stuebner , Linux Kernel List-Id: linux-rockchip.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 11:17:27AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 11:14 AM Matthias Kaehlcke wrote: > > Each transfer has it's own work struct (allocated on the stack), hence > > a) does not occur. b) is still true, but shouldn't be a problem on > > its own. > > Actually, it could be much worse _because_ it's on the stack. The > worker could write something back to the work after the work has been > de-allocated. That's bad. Sure, I said "not a problem on its own." ~~~~~~~~~~ The worker is owned by this driver and supposedly we know what we are doing. Changing a member in the struct after calling complete() would likely be a bug anyway (though not necessarily a fatal one).