linux-ext4 - Re: [patch 1/1] ext4: use proper little-endian bitops

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: <CAC5umyhz-RNL=agBsbG4oP0z0AHS3c6vjmKH-qOyn9SjQS0FAg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 29 Jul 2011 21:25:34 +0900
From:	Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>
To:	Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>
Cc:	amir73il@...il.com, xiaoqiangnk@...il.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, tytso@....edu,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, adilger.kernel@...ger.ca
Subject: Re: [patch 1/1] ext4: use proper little-endian bitops

2011/7/29 Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011, Akinobu Mita wrote:
>
>> 2011/7/29 Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>:
>>
>> >> diff -puN fs/ext4/ext4.h~ext4-use-proper-little-endian-bitops fs/ext4/ext4.h
>> >> --- a/fs/ext4/ext4.h~ext4-use-proper-little-endian-bitops
>> >> +++ a/fs/ext4/ext4.h
>> >> @@ -931,12 +931,13 @@ struct ext4_inode_info {
>> >>  #define test_opt2(sb, opt)           (EXT4_SB(sb)->s_mount_opt2 & \
>> >>                                        EXT4_MOUNT2_##opt)
>> >>
>> >> -#define ext4_set_bit                 __test_and_set_bit_le
>> >> +#define ext4_test_and_set_bit                __test_and_set_bit_le
>> >> +#define ext4_set_bit                 __set_bit_le
>> >>  #define ext4_set_bit_atomic          ext2_set_bit_atomic
>> > We can remove this since it is not used anywhere and it is just a macro
>> > for test_and_set_bit_le() anyway.
>>
>> Amir Goldstein requested not to remove it because ext4 snapshot patches is
>> using ext4_set_bit_atomic(), although I really don't know about the status of
>> mainline inclusion.
>
> It is not anywhere near inclusion. Moreover it is using
> __test_and_set_bit_le, but the name does not really imply *test*.

BTW, do you think of anything more preferable name?  Because ext[23] and
nilfs2 are still using them, so renaming can avoid confusion.

> So please, just remove it and when Amir is going to
> need it someday he might add proper define with the proper name using
> the proper set, or test_and_set functions.

OK, I'll remove if no one has strong objection against it.
--
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