Re: [PATCH] lockdep: fix spurious 'inconsistent lock state' warning

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Monday, August 18, 2008 - 12:42 am

* Dmitry Baryshkov <dbaryshkov@gmail.com> wrote:


good spotting! Applied to tip/core/urgent, thanks Dmitry.

I'm wondering, is there any way to teach gcc some sanity here - a safer 
variant of bitfields, that is just not allowed to overflow into or 
corrupt nearby fields? The fact that a benign looking hlock->state = 15 
can corrupt other fields worries me quite a bit. Valid C semantics or 
not, this is a totally dangerous construct. The space savings are very 
real though, so it would be nice to get 'safer bitfields', somehow.

	Ingo
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH] lockdep: fix spurious 'inconsistent lock state ..., Ingo Molnar, (Mon Aug 18, 12:42 am)