linux-kernel - Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 10/19] UML - Remove spinlock wrapper functions

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

Message-ID: <20060804141447.GA3837@ccure.user-mode-linux.org>
Date:	Fri, 4 Aug 2006 10:14:47 -0400
From:	Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>
To:	alessandro salvatori <sandr8@...il.com>
Cc:	akpm@...l.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 10/19] UML - Remove spinlock wrapper functions

On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 01:00:43PM +0000, alessandro salvatori wrote:
>   the new lock irq_lock is still static, but we now have preprocessor
> macros to be included from a header file instead of non-static functions in
> the same module as the static irq_lock.

I don't understand.  The changes in this patch are -
	remove two functions and their declarations
	replace calls to those functions with spin_lock_irq_save and
spin_unlock_irqsave
	move the spinlock declaration above the spin_(un)lock_irq_save
calls

Which of these are you talking about?

				Jeff
-
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/