linux-kernel - Re: [Patchs vs. percpu-next] Use this_cpu

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200910132221.35208.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date:	Tue, 13 Oct 2009 22:21:34 +1030
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: [Patchs vs. percpu-next] Use this_cpu_xx to dynamically allocate counters

On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 04:27:53 am Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Oct 2009, Rusty Russell wrote:
> 
> > Does this mean we can kill local.h soon?
> 
> Can we remove local.h from modules?

This looks sweet to me!

Only comment: not sure struct module_ref is required once we have __percpu
markers.

Acked-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>

Thanks!
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/