All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
To: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
Cc: xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [xfs-masters] [PATCH 11/17] fs/xfs/quota: Add missing mutex_unlock
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2010 03:34:29 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C05D145.6080602@sandeen.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1005261757050.23743@ask.diku.dk>

Julia Lawall wrote:
> From: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
> 
> Add a mutex_unlock missing on the error path.  The use of this lock is
> balanced elsewhere in the file.
> 
> The semantic match that finds this problem is as follows:
> (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
> 
> // <smpl>
> @@
> expression E1;
> @@
> 
> * mutex_lock(E1,...);
>   <+... when != E1
>   if (...) {
>     ... when != E1
> *   return ...;
>   }
>   ...+>
> * mutex_unlock(E1,...);
> // </smpl>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
> 
> ---
> The use of ENOMEM rather than -ENOMEM is also a bit odd.

All the xfs core code uses positive errors, it's an irix holdover.

As things bubble up to the vfs interface, signs get switched.

Yeah, it's a bit odd, but nobody dares change it ;)

Maybe semantic patching could fix it ;)

-Eric


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
To: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
Cc: xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [xfs-masters] [PATCH 11/17] fs/xfs/quota: Add missing mutex_unlock
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2010 22:34:29 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C05D145.6080602@sandeen.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1005261757050.23743@ask.diku.dk>

Julia Lawall wrote:
> From: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
> 
> Add a mutex_unlock missing on the error path.  The use of this lock is
> balanced elsewhere in the file.
> 
> The semantic match that finds this problem is as follows:
> (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
> 
> // <smpl>
> @@
> expression E1;
> @@
> 
> * mutex_lock(E1,...);
>   <+... when != E1
>   if (...) {
>     ... when != E1
> *   return ...;
>   }
>   ...+>
> * mutex_unlock(E1,...);
> // </smpl>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
> 
> ---
> The use of ENOMEM rather than -ENOMEM is also a bit odd.

All the xfs core code uses positive errors, it's an irix holdover.

As things bubble up to the vfs interface, signs get switched.

Yeah, it's a bit odd, but nobody dares change it ;)

Maybe semantic patching could fix it ;)

-Eric

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
To: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
Cc: Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>,
	xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [xfs-masters] [PATCH 11/17] fs/xfs/quota: Add missing mutex_unlock
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2010 22:34:29 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C05D145.6080602@sandeen.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1005261757050.23743@ask.diku.dk>

Julia Lawall wrote:
> From: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
> 
> Add a mutex_unlock missing on the error path.  The use of this lock is
> balanced elsewhere in the file.
> 
> The semantic match that finds this problem is as follows:
> (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
> 
> // <smpl>
> @@
> expression E1;
> @@
> 
> * mutex_lock(E1,...);
>   <+... when != E1
>   if (...) {
>     ... when != E1
> *   return ...;
>   }
>   ...+>
> * mutex_unlock(E1,...);
> // </smpl>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
> 
> ---
> The use of ENOMEM rather than -ENOMEM is also a bit odd.

All the xfs core code uses positive errors, it's an irix holdover.

As things bubble up to the vfs interface, signs get switched.

Yeah, it's a bit odd, but nobody dares change it ;)

Maybe semantic patching could fix it ;)

-Eric


  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-06-02  3:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-05-26 15:57 [PATCH 11/17] fs/xfs/quota: Add missing mutex_unlock Julia Lawall
2010-05-26 15:57 ` Julia Lawall
2010-05-26 15:57 ` Julia Lawall
2010-05-28 17:57 ` Alex Elder
2010-05-28 17:57   ` Alex Elder
2010-05-28 17:57   ` Alex Elder
2010-06-02  3:34 ` Eric Sandeen [this message]
2010-06-02  3:34   ` [xfs-masters] " Eric Sandeen
2010-06-02  3:34   ` Eric Sandeen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4C05D145.6080602@sandeen.net \
    --to=sandeen@sandeen.net \
    --cc=aelder@sgi.com \
    --cc=julia@diku.dk \
    --cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.