From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20120301213923.395633823@linuxfoundation.org> Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 13:39:29 -0800 From: Greg KH To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, OGAWA Hirofumi , Joe Perches , Sven-Haegar Koch Subject: [ 07/34] printk_ratelimited(): fix uninitialized spinlock In-Reply-To: <20120301214654.GA13231@kroah.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 2.6.32-longterm review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: OGAWA Hirofumi commit d8521fcc5e0ad3e79bbc4231bb20a6cdc2b50164 upstream. ratelimit_state initialization of printk_ratelimited() seems broken. This fixes it by using DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE() to initialize spinlock properly. Signed-off-by: OGAWA Hirofumi Cc: Joe Perches Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds Cc: Sven-Haegar Koch Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- include/linux/kernel.h | 15 +++++++-------- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) --- a/include/linux/kernel.h +++ b/include/linux/kernel.h @@ -411,14 +411,13 @@ static inline char *pack_hex_byte(char * * no local ratelimit_state used in the !PRINTK case */ #ifdef CONFIG_PRINTK -#define printk_ratelimited(fmt, ...) ({ \ - static struct ratelimit_state _rs = { \ - .interval = DEFAULT_RATELIMIT_INTERVAL, \ - .burst = DEFAULT_RATELIMIT_BURST, \ - }; \ - \ - if (__ratelimit(&_rs)) \ - printk(fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__); \ +#define printk_ratelimited(fmt, ...) ({ \ + static DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE(_rs, \ + DEFAULT_RATELIMIT_INTERVAL, \ + DEFAULT_RATELIMIT_BURST); \ + \ + if (__ratelimit(&_rs)) \ + printk(fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__); \ }) #else /* No effect, but we still get type checking even in the !PRINTK case: */