On Wed, 13 Dec 2006, dcarpenter wrote: > Could someone look over this patch as well? It should hopefully > fix the list corruption bug on: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214402 > > Add a missing INIT_LIST_HEAD() > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/core/devio.c b/drivers/usb/core/devio.c > index fed92be..5efbf81 100644 > --- a/drivers/usb/core/devio.c > +++ b/drivers/usb/core/devio.c > @@ -570,6 +570,7 @@ static int usbdev_open(struct inode *ino > ps->dev = dev; > ps->file = file; > spin_lock_init(&ps->lock); > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ps->list); > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ps->async_pending); > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ps->async_completed); > init_waitqueue_head(&ps->wait);
The patch is correct and it should fix the bug report. However the problem mentioned in the bug report isn't actually a bug. If you look a little farther down in the source code, you'll see that ps->list immediately gets overwritten by a list_add_tail() call. I don't see any real advantage to writing data that will immediately be overwritten, simply in order to avoid a false positive from an overzealous list-corruption detector. Has there been some high-level decision that all list_head structures must now be initialized prior to use? Alan Stern ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel