| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <961aa3351001311854s40d33804m715d7643fe430b5b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 11:54:14 +0900 From: Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] sched: Use for_each_bit 2010/2/1 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>: > On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 14:06:10 +0200 Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com> wrote: > >> On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com> wrote: >> > __#define for_each_cpupri_active(array, idx) __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __\ >> > - __for (idx = find_first_bit(array, CPUPRI_NR_PRIORITIES); __ __ \ >> > - __ __ __ idx < CPUPRI_NR_PRIORITIES; __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __\ >> > - __ __ __ idx = find_next_bit(array, CPUPRI_NR_PRIORITIES, idx+1)) >> > + __ __ __ for_each_bit(idx, array, CPUPRI_NR_PRIORITIES) >> >> It should be called for_each_set_bit(). > > Agree. (I'm resending because I failed to reply all) You mean for_each_bit() should be renamed to for_each_set_bit() ? I'm not sure. But if so, find_first_bit() also should be renamed to find_first_set_bit() and so on? -- 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