Re: [PATCH] x86: prevent call to xfree() in dump_irqs() while in an irq context

[Keir Fraser <keir.xen@gmail.com>]

On 22/05/2012 09:05, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:

>>>> Rather than using the non-obvious conditional around an xfree() that
>>>> would be passed NULL only in the inverse case (which could easily get
>>>> removed by a future change on the basis that calling xfree(NULL) is
>>>> benign), switch the order of checks in xfree() itself and only suppress
>>>> the call to XSM that could potentially call xmalloc().
>>>> 
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>>> 
>>> Acked-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
>> 
>> I'm a bit dubious about having a function that can be called in irq context
>> for some input values but not others. I suppose this trivial case for
>> xfree() is obvious enough, so I'm okay with it. If it was anything more
>> subtle, I would probably nack.
> 
> I did ask that in the original thread, but you never responded
> either way. Is your above reply an ack then, or should I commit
> Andy's original patch instead?

It's an Ack :)