| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: One issue in kill_timer
On 04/06/2010 04:02, "Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Currently kill_timer assume the timer is either active/inactive. However,
> sometimes caller have called kill_timer already. The latter one may cause
> crash because the timer's list has been delted and cause
> list_del(&timer->inactive) failed.
It's a bug in kill_timer(). I will fix it.
> BTW, I'm curios why TIMER_STATUS_killed > TIMER_STATUS_inactive? Per my
> understanding, the timer status should be invalid->uninitied->inactive->active
> (heap or list), so IMO TIMER_STATUS_killed should be < TIMER_STATUS_inactive.
The ordering doesn't matter. I can switch killed and inactive if it makes
things a bit clearer, however.
Thanks,
Keir
> Thanks
> --jyh
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home