| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 04:15:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
To: Kentaro Takeda <takedakn@...data.co.jp>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, chrisw@...s-sol.org
Subject: Re: [TOMOYO 05/15](repost) Domain transition handler functions.
On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Kentaro Takeda wrote:
> +
> + mb(); /* Instead of using spinlock. */
> + ptr = domain_initializer_list;
> + if (ptr) {
> + while (ptr->next)
> + ptr = ptr->next;
> + ptr->next = new_entry;
> + } else
> + domain_initializer_list = new_entry;
> +
Please use standard kernel list handling, per include/linux/list.h
Why do you need to avoid spinlocks for these manipulations?
- James
--
James Morris
<jmorris@...ei.org>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists