From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org>
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 17:50:16 +0000
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Some function locals in udev_rules_parse.c were
Message-Id: <1220291416.29777.2.camel@lgn.site>
List-Id: <linux-hotplug.vger.kernel.org>
References: <48BAD549.6080304@tuffmail.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <48BAD549.6080304@tuffmail.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 2008-09-01 at 18:37 +0100, Alan Jenkins wrote:
> Kay Sievers wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 19:30, Alan Jenkins <alan-jenkins@tuffmail.co.uk> wrote:
> >   
> >> This does not affect current behaviour.  However, it is required to
> >> make the functions thread-safe.  (I'm playing with a threaded udevd).
> >>     
> >
> >   
> >> -       static struct udev_rule *rule;
> >> +       struct udev_rule *rule;
> >>     
> >
> > It's not needlessly static, we return _this_ value. The parsing stuff
> > is not thread safe at the moment, we would need a real fix, this would
> > break it.
> >   
> Thanks for looking at these patches.
> 
> The functions do "return rule", but they always write to it before
> reading it, so there's no persistent state here.  And they don't "return
> &rule", so it's fine for the variable to be on the stack.  Did I miss
> something?

Ah, they should return a pointer to the data passed in to the function,
which should be fine.

Applied.

Thanks,
Kay