netdev - Re: [PERCPU] Remove & in front of this_cpu

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:	Thu, 04 Apr 2013 07:29:46 -0700
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>, RongQing Li <roy.qing.li@...il.com>,
	Shan Wei <davidshan@...cent.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PERCPU] Remove & in front of this_cpu_ptr

On Thu, 2013-04-04 at 13:52 +0000, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2013, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> 
> > I agree with you, I prefer &this_cpu_ptr(percpu_pointer)->field
> >
> > The offset is added after getting the address of the (percpu) base
> > object.
> 
> There are two offsets being added!


I was speaking of the offsetof(struct ..., field), not on the 'offset'
you think (the percpu one).

Thats why I prefer &this_cpu_ptr(percpu_pointer)->field

Its clearer for me, but thats a very minor issue.



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html