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:	Thu, 17 Jul 2008 15:09:16 -0500
From:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
To:	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	menage@...gle.com, peterz@...radead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	laijs@...fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] cpuset: fix wrong calculation of relax domain
 level

In looking at this, I notice something I should have questioned before.

The include/linux/sched.h code:

    struct sched_domain_attr {
	    int relax_domain_level;
    };

    #define SD_ATTR_INIT    (struct sched_domain_attr) {    \
	    .relax_domain_level = -1,                       \
    }                                                                                                                                 

and the associated passing of relax_domain_level's embedded inside
a kmalloc'c struct sched_domain_attr 'dattr' seems like excessive
obfuscating apparatus to me.  Unless someone has short term plans
to be adding some other attributes to this sched_domain_attr, I
suspect it would make more sense just to pass relax_domain_level's
as explicit lvalues, dropping all this attr stuff.

Adding unnecessary abstractions 'for future growth' is usually a
bad idea.  It impedes current code understanding more than it aids
future code growth.

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <pj@....com> 1.940.382.4214
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ