linux-kernel - Re: [patch 09/10] SLUB: Do our own locking via slab_lock and slab

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: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710281713020.6766@sbz-30.cs.Helsinki.FI>
Date:	Sun, 28 Oct 2007 17:14:12 +0200 (EET)
From:	Pekka J Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
cc:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [patch 09/10] SLUB: Do our own locking via slab_lock and
 slab_unlock.

On Sun, 28 Oct 2007, Pekka J Enberg wrote:
> > +	 __release(bitlock);
> 
> This needs a less generic name and maybe a comment explaining that it's 
> not annotating a proper lock? Or maybe we can drop it completely?

Ah, I see that <linux/bit_spinlock.h> does the same thing, so strike that.
-
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/