linux-kernel - Re: Pull request for semaphore include changes

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: <adawsmobm3f.fsf@cisco.com>
Date:	Wed, 23 Apr 2008 08:57:24 -0700
From:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Pull request for semaphore include changes

 >  drivers/infiniband/core/user_mad.c            |    2 +-

Let me say up front I have no problem with this change, which moved from
<asm/semaphore.h> to <linux/semaphore.h>.  So take this email as an
honest question and not any form of complaint or criticism.  But looking
at that user_mad.c file in particular, I don't see any use of anything
that looks like it would come from semaphore.h.

So I'm wondering why you didn't just delete the inclusion, as you did in
other places?  I can merge a follow-up that does that cleanup (which
builds and works fine on my usual architectures) but I want to avoid
breaking avr32 allyesconfig or something like that.

(Commit 2fe7e6f7 "IB/umad: Simplify and fix locking" changed the locking
scheme, so maybe you looked at an older file)

Thanks,
  Roland
--
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/