linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/38] arch/x86/ia32: Use time_before, time_before

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]

Date:	Sun, 30 Dec 2007 14:33:35 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/38] arch/x86/ia32: Use time_before, time_before_eq,
	etc.


* Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk> wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Dec 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Dec 24, 2007 at 03:23:19PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > From: Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
> > > 
> > > The functions time_before, time_before_eq, time_after, and time_after_eq
> > > are more robust for comparing jiffies against other values.
> > 
> > The old code was actually correct I think, but the change is ok for me.
> 
> Please ignore the patch.  All of my before_eq and after_eq's are 
> backwards due to parsing <= as >= and vice versa.  I will try again.

your x86 patches (#7, #8 and #9) do not include any *_eq() comparisons 
and they all seem to be correct. So picked those three up into x86.git - 
let me know if there's any breakage in them that i missed.

	Ingo
--
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/