linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] FRV: Fix the section attribute on UP DECLARE_PER

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:57:45 +0100
From:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	dhowells@...hat.com, tj@...nel.org, mingo@...e.hu,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] FRV: Fix the section attribute on UP DECLARE_PER_CPU()

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> We should have the DECLARE_PER_CPU() #defines next to the DEFINE_PER_CPU 
> ones, rather than somewhere else.
> 
> So moving the logic to <asm-generic/percpu.h> is wrong - make it all be in 
> <linux/percpu.h> so that they can be maintained together.

Agreed, it would be nice.  However, x86 requires it to be declared in the
middle of asm/percpu.h (ie: in asm-generic/percpu.h).  I'm trying to sort it
out, but it's like trying to juggle hyperdimensional spaghetti:-/ How much
header file overhaul do you wish to indulge in?  And can I split some headers
into separate headers for declarations and inline functions?

David
--
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/