linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] Introduce ext4_find_next

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]

Message-Id: <20071112235910.35a635e4.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Mon, 12 Nov 2007 23:59:10 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Introduce ext4_find_next_bit

On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:55:05 +0530 "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> Also add generic_find_next_le_bit
> 
> This gets used by the ext4 multi block allocator patches.
> 

arm allmodconfig:

fs/ext4/mballoc.c: In function `ext4_mb_generate_buddy':
fs/ext4/mballoc.c:836: error: implicit declaration of function `ext2_find_next_bit'

This patch makes my head spin.

Why did we declare generic_find_next_le_bit() in
include/asm-powerpc/bitops.h (wrong) as well as in
include/asm-generic/bitops/le.h (presumably correct)?

Why is it touching a powerpc file and no any other architectures? 
Something screwed up in powerpc land?

And why did arm break?

Shudder.  Anyway, please fix, and if that fix requires that various
braindamaged be repaired, please repair the braindamage rather than going
along with it.

Thanks.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html