linux-kernel - Re: Does CONFIG_PARAVIRT imply usage of byte locks?

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: <alpine.LRH.1.10.0901092323270.24105@twin.jikos.cz>
Date:	Fri, 9 Jan 2009 23:24:06 +0100 (CET)
From:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...source.com>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Does CONFIG_PARAVIRT imply usage of byte locks?

On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, Jiri Kosina wrote:

> It seems to me that paravirt_use_bytelocks() is a dead code that gets 
> never called, and the same applies to the implementations of write locks. 

	s/of write locks/of byte locks

of course, sorry.

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
--
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/