linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 21 Jan 2014 11:47:21 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree


* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 04:39:45PM -0500, Len Brown wrote:
> > > As a side note, at minimum the semantic and compatibility difference
> > > needs to be _very_ clearly present in the naming. Something like
> > > mwait_old_() or mwait_core2_(). That way such dependencies and
> > > assumptions don't get lost in code restructuring, etc.
> > 
> > Agreed.
> > We started with mwait_idle() -- which was erroneously removed
> > and is now being restored under it original name.
> > 
> > The "new" function is mwait_idle_with_hints() -- which uses the 
> > additional hints that were not available w/ the original MWAIT 
> > instruction. Where "new" is Core Duo and later -- all the 
> > processor that can use MWAIT for C-states deeper than C1.
> 
> I'm still waiting for someone to explain what's wrong with:
> 
> static inline void mwait_idle(void)
> {
> 	local_irq_enable();
> 	mwait_idle_with_hints(0, 0);
> }

Absolutely agreed, we don't want to carry it on 'just because', the 
compatibility aspect needs to be documented - otherwise we degrade 
into cargo cult programming.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/