Re: 2.6.14 kernels and above copy_to_user stupidity with IRQ disabledcheck

[Phillip Susi]

jmerkey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> OK.  Got it.  I guess I need to restructure.  And BTW, This was a code fragment
> only, the spinlock gets released when -EFAULT is called -- was just an example.
>
> Jeff

Unless you have redefined EFAULT in some strange and hideous way, it is 
not "called" and doesn't free the spinlock.  EFAULT is defined as a 
literal integer, so you're just returning a number without freeing the 
spinlock. 


If you have redefined EFAULT to a macro function call or whatever, then 
don't do that, it's REALLY horrible coding practice. 


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/