linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 4/6] Preempt-RCU: Implementation

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]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0802291528071.2723@scrub.home>
Date:	Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:31:52 +0100 (CET)
From:	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
cc:	ego@...ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Paul E McKenney <paulmck@...ibm.com>,
	Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
	Ted Tso <tytso@...ibm.com>, dvhltc@...ibm.com,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, bunk@...nel.org,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...edesktop.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/6] Preempt-RCU: Implementation

Hi,

On Fri, 29 Feb 2008, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> > Also why is this a choice? Are more RCU types planned?
> 
> Why shouldn't it be a choice? You can have CLASSIC_RCU or PREEMPT_RCU, one
> or the other and not both. Sounds perfect for being a choice.

With this logic almost every bool could be implemented via choice.
A simple bool perfectly gives you two choices too.

bye, Roman
--
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/