From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755750Ab0LQXu7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Dec 2010 18:50:59 -0500 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:48597 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751979Ab0LQXu6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Dec 2010 18:50:58 -0500 Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 15:49:47 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Baruch Siach Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] delay.h: add __must_check to msleep_interruptible Message-Id: <20101217154947.3e95488c.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.0.2 (GTK+ 2.20.1; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 4 Nov 2010 10:55:41 +0200 Baruch Siach wrote: > Code calling msleep_interruptible() must be aware that sleep time might be > shorter than intended as a result of a signal being caught. Code not checking > the return value of msleep_interruptible() is probably buggy, unless it's doing > the signal_pending() check itself, which is redundant. > True. But there are around 250 callsites which don't check the msleep_interruptible() return value. I don't think I want to add 250 new warnings to the kernel build - it'll take *years* to get them all weeded out and meanwhile it will cause people to miss other warnings while they're ignoring the msleep_interruptible() warnings. So. Some lucky duck needs to get down and start fixing all these things first, please. Meanwhile, a checkpatch rule which prevents new occurrences would be good. Except lots of developers and maintainers can't be assed running checkpatch, so a volunteer who regularly runs linux-next.patch and patch-2.6.Y-rcY through checkpatch and then hassles people would also be good.