linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] make schedule_on_each_cpu() look like on_each

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

Message-Id: <1185475292.15205.17.camel@lappy>
Date:	Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:41:32 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] make schedule_on_each_cpu() look like on_each_cpu()

On Thu, 2007-07-26 at 22:27 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 07/26, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > -int schedule_on_each_cpu(work_func_t func)
> > +int schedule_on_each_cpu(void (*func)(void *info), void *info, int retry, int wait)

> Another off-topic question: shouldn't we kill the unused "retry"
> parameter of on_each_cpu() instead of mirroring it here?

I'm fine with doing so, but that will be a somewhat larger patch. If you
(and perhaps Andrew?) think that is preferable I'll prepare such a
patch.

> > +out:
> > +	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> > +		if (works[cpu])
> > +			kfree(works[cpu]);
> > +	}
> 
> Small nit, kfree(NULL) is OK.

Habbits die hard :-/


-
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/