linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHSET x86/core/percpu] improve the first percpu chunk allocation

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: <200902251710.27205.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date:	Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:10:26 +1030
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	tglx@...utronix.de, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	hpa@...or.com, jeremy@...p.org, cpw@....com,
	nickpiggin@...oo.com.au, ink@...assic.park.msu.ru
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET x86/core/percpu] improve the first percpu chunk allocation

On Wednesday 25 February 2009 07:46:59 Ingo Molnar wrote:
>  kernel/trace/trace_functions_graph.c: In function ‘graph_trace_close’:
>  kernel/trace/trace_functions_graph.c:836: error: implicit declaration of function ‘percpu_free’
> 
> that's free_percpu() now, right?
> 
> Btw., why was this rename done? We generally standardize on 
> hierarchical names, going from the more general to the more 
> specific names, left to right.

Agreed, but we had both, doing identical things, and free_percpu outnumbered
percpu_free by a significant factor (about 40 to 5 IIRC).

Simple pragmatism, and it matches alloc_percpu.
Rusty.
--
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/