Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety

[Al Viro]

On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 12:22:44PM +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > the question is: which is more important, the type safety of a 
> > container_of() [or type cast], which if we get it wrong produces a 
> > /very/ trivial crash that is trivial to fix

The hell it is.  You get wrong fields of a big struct read and modified.
Silently.

Besides, I can show you fsckloads of cases when we do *NOT* pass a
pointer to struct the timer is embedded into.  Some of them called directly
(and no, the thing they get as argument doesn't point to anything that
would contain a timer_list).

> > structure size all around the kernel? I believe the latter is more 
> > important.
> 
> Indeed yes.

Guys, please, look at actual users of that stuff.
-
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/