linux-kernel - Re: On patch "Remove all #inclusions of asm/system.h"

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:	Sat, 31 Mar 2012 22:44:52 +0200
From:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: On patch "Remove all #inclusions of asm/system.h"

On Mar 31 David Howells wrote:
> Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de> wrote:
> > For example, drivers/firewire/{core-device,core-topology,ohci,sbp2}.c use
> > smp_rmb()¹ and used to include asm/system.h.  Now they do not include
> > asm/barrier.h.  Is this by mistake or on purpose?
> 
> I tried to make sure allyesconfig worked for x86_64 and a bunch of defconfigs
> worked.  I can't guarantee that that got 100% coverage.  I also knew there
> would be some breakage from the base Linux kernel having moved on by the time
> Linus pulled myu patches - though I don't know if this is the case here (I
> suspect not).

It's not a problem; they now get barrier.h via spinlock.h.  I just
wondered whether absence of #include <asm/barrier.h> in those files had a
deeper non-obvious meaning.  Since it doesn't I will just put that include
in them next time around when I do some housekeeping there.
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-===-- --== =====
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
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/