From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751145AbWGQSxd (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jul 2006 14:53:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751148AbWGQSxd (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jul 2006 14:53:33 -0400 Received: from rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de ([129.143.116.10]:41949 "EHLO rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751145AbWGQSxc (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jul 2006 14:53:32 -0400 Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 20:53:30 +0200 From: Andreas Mohr To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: keir@xensource.com, Tony Lindgren , zach@vmware.com, Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner Subject: kernel/timer.c: next_timer_interrupt() strange/buggy(?) code (2.6.18-rc1-mm2) Message-ID: <20060717185330.GA32264@rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Priority: none Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi all, next_timer_interrupt() contains the following gem: /* Check tv2-tv5. */ varray[0] = &base->tv2; varray[1] = &base->tv3; varray[2] = &base->tv4; varray[3] = &base->tv5; for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) { j = INDEX(i); do { if (list_empty(varray[i]->vec + j)) { j = (j + 1) & TVN_MASK; continue; } list_for_each_entry(nte, varray[i]->vec + j, entry) if (time_before(nte->expires, expires)) expires = nte->expires; if (j < (INDEX(i)) && i < 3) list = varray[i + 1]->vec + (INDEX(i + 1)); goto found; } while (j != (INDEX(i))); } found: if (list) { Excuse me, but why do we have a while loop here if the last instruction in the while loop is a straight "goto found"? (a "continue" simply continue:s the loop without checking the loop condition at the bottom, right?) Few lines above there's similar code: /* Look for timer events in tv1. */ j = base->timer_jiffies & TVR_MASK; do { list_for_each_entry(nte, base->tv1.vec + j, entry) { expires = nte->expires; if (j < (base->timer_jiffies & TVR_MASK)) list = base->tv2.vec + (INDEX(0)); goto found; } j = (j + 1) & TVR_MASK; } while (j != (base->timer_jiffies & TVR_MASK)); However in this case now we process *one* list only, so the "goto found" should be ok since we don't need to iterate through the multiple tv2-tv5 lists as in the other potentially buggy loop. Also, is the base->tv1.vec vs. base->tv2.vec difference above ok? Possibly I'm too dense while reading this code, though... Andreas Mohr