linux-kernel - Re: [patch -mm 2/2] mempolicy: use default_policy mode instead of MPOL

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 7 Mar 2008 17:33:06 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, clameter@....com,
	Lee.Schermerhorn@...com, ak@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch -mm 2/2] mempolicy: use default_policy mode instead of
 MPOL_DEFAULT

On Fri, 7 Mar 2008, Paul Jackson wrote:

> > So instead of checking for comparisons against a mempolicy's mode to
> > MPOL_DEFAULT or falling back stricly to MPOL_DEFAULT throughout the code,
> > we should use the mode that is defined in this struct.
> 
> Is this just a stylistic choice?  That is, is the same machine
> code produced either way?
> 
> If that's the case, could you briefly explain why you prefer
> one style (default_policy.policy) over the other (MPOL_DEFAULT)?
> 

Very fast response!

Yes, the same code is generated since default_policy.policy is statically 
declared as MPOL_DEFAULT.

I chose this because checks in mpol_new() to return NULL if the mode is 
MPOL_DEFAULT is purely based on the fact that, as the default system 
policy, policy task or VMA pointers are set to &default_policy.
--
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/