linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: percpu tree build warning

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 25 Nov 2009 21:44:08 +1030
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	"Fr??d??ric Weisbecker" <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: percpu tree build warning

On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:20:04 pm Ingo Molnar wrote:
> If yes then that needs to be fixed in the percpu tree. per-cpu variables 
> used to have a __per_cpu prefix and that should be maintained - the two 
> namespaces are obviously separate on the logical space, so they should 
> never overlap in the implementational space either.

No, we've been through this.

sparse annotations replace the per_cpu prefix now per-cpu vars can be used
withn other than per-cpu ops (ie. their address can be usefully taken).

The prefix crutch predated sparse.  And it was certainly never supposed to
let people write confusing and crap code like this.

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/