[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] linux-user/syscall.c: Let all lock_user_struct(
From: |
Chen Gang S |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] linux-user/syscall.c: Let all lock_user_struct() and unlock_user_struct() paired with each other |
Date: |
Mon, 26 Jan 2015 22:59:55 +0800 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 |
On 1/26/15 06:10, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 25 January 2015 at 21:59, Chen Gang S <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On 1/25/15 20:49, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> Are you claiming that you've reviewed *all* the code in this
>>> file for mismatched lock/unlock calls? If so, it would be nice
>>> to say so explicitly in the commit message. If not, it would be
>>> nice if the commit message was clearer about what areas of the
>>> code it applied to. The code changes are correct, though.
>>>
>>
>> At present, I finished all lock_user_struct() and unlock_user_struct()
>> in "linux-user/syscall.c". For me, after this patch, they are all OK.
>>
>> But for all lock/unlock in "linux-user/syscall.c", for me, I am doubting
>> several areas, but I did not send patch for them:
>>
>> - I need check them carefully again to be sure they are really issue:
>>
>> Read the related code again and again, if I really treat it as an
>> issue, I shall make related patch (and pass compiling, at least).
>>
>> - I have no enough time resources on it:
>
> That's fine. I'm definitely not asking you to do this work.
OK, thanks. :-)
> I would just like the commit message to be clear about the
> scope of the work the patch covers. If the patch is just "Fix
> mismatched lock/unlock calls in IPC struct conversion functions"
> then that's fine, but the commit message should say that. At the
> moment the commit message is very vague.
>
OK, thanks.
I am not quite familiar with this file, so I describe the modification
by function name, e.g. lock_user_struct() and unlick_user_struct() in
the patch subject.
Welcome to help improve the patch comments. If necessary to send patch
v2, please let me know, I shall try.
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
Open, share, and attitude like air, water, and life which God blessed
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] linux-user/syscall.c: Let all lock_user_struct() and unlock_user_struct() paired with each other, Chen Gang S, 2015/01/25
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] linux-user/syscall.c: Let all lock_user_struct() and unlock_user_struct() paired with each other, Peter Maydell, 2015/01/25
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] linux-user/syscall.c: Let all lock_user_struct() and unlock_user_struct() paired with each other, Chen Gang S, 2015/01/25
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] linux-user/syscall.c: Let all lock_user_struct() and unlock_user_struct() paired with each other, Peter Maydell, 2015/01/25
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] linux-user/syscall.c: Let all lock_user_struct() and unlock_user_struct() paired with each other,
Chen Gang S <=
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] linux-user/syscall.c: Let all lock_user_struct() and unlock_user_struct() paired with each other, Peter Maydell, 2015/01/26
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] linux-user/syscall.c: Let all lock_user_struct() and unlock_user_struct() paired with each other, Chen Gang S, 2015/01/26
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] linux-user/syscall.c: Let all lock_user_struct() and unlock_user_struct() paired with each other, Riku Voipio, 2015/01/28
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] linux-user/syscall.c: Let all lock_user_struct() and unlock_user_struct() paired with each other, Chen Gang S, 2015/01/28
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] linux-user/syscall.c: Let all lock_user_struct() and unlock_user_struct() paired with each other, Peter Maydell, 2015/01/28
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] linux-user/syscall.c: Let all lock_user_struct() and unlock_user_struct() paired with each other, Chen Gang S, 2015/01/28