linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] A need for "yesno"-function? (and "cleanup" of kernel.h) (was: Re: [KJ] [RFC] A need for a "yesno"-function?)

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 16 Mar 2007 18:09:02 +0100
From:	Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se>
To:	Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@...mix.at>
CC:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
	Kernel Janitors List <kernel-janitors@...ts.osdl.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] A need for "yesno"-function? (and "cleanup" of kernel.h)
 (was: Re: [KJ] [RFC] A need for a "yesno"-function?)

Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 16:24 +0100, Richard Knutsson wrote:
> [...]
>   
>> more readable). The big problem is, where to put it? Seems wrong to put 
>> in <linux/string.h> since it appear to be a replica of userspace's 
>> <string.h> (otherwise, why put mem*-functions in there?).
>>     
>
> memcpy(3) and memcmp(3) are also there in user-space.
>   
Did I miss something or did you just restate what was stated? (If it was 
not a replica, I think the mem*-functions would be better placed in 
memory.h, or such)

Richard Knutsson

-
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/