On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 11:00 AM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote:
> Hello Kinsey, > > since this patch fixes a bug, there should be a ticket. There should be > also a test case which demonstrates the problem and shows that the patch > fixes the issue. > > I'll open an issue and see what I can do about creating a test case for JFFS2 that reproduces this issue. > > > How do you ensure that nobody calls jffs2_queue_delayed_work() with a > node present on this temporary chain? > This is handled by the off_chain checks along with the locking. If the node is already in a chain, then delayed work is already pending and will be handled upon expiration so additional attempts to queue the node can be ignored. See below for off_chain issues. > > The existing code seems to have more issues. Firstly, it uses the > protected chain methods. I'll swap the protected calls to unprotected for those surrounded by locking. > Secondly, is uses > rtems_chain_is_node_off_chain() with nobody setting a node off chain > after use. > I was developing under RTEMS_DEBUG which does set the node off chain upon extraction. I'll get this fixed for the non-RTEMS_DEBUG case. Thanks for taking a look at this. Kinsey
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
