linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/10] x86: Unify percpu.h

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: <20080110134835.GE5886@elte.hu>
Date:	Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:48:35 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Cc:	Dave Hansen <haveblue@...ibm.com>, travis@....com,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, tglx@...utronix.de,
	mingo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] x86: Unify percpu.h


* Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> wrote:

> On Wed, 9 Jan 2008, Dave Hansen wrote:
> 
> > Then I really think this particular patch belongs in that other 
> > patch set.  Here, it makes very little sense, and it's on the end 
> > anyway.
> 
> It makes sense in that both percpu_32/64 are very small as a result of 
> earlier patches and so its justifiable to put them together to 
> simplify the next patchset.

i'd agree with this - lets just keep the existing flow of patches 
intact. It's not like the percpu code is in any danger of becoming 
unclean or quirky - it's one of the best-maintained pieces of kernel 
code :)

	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/