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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 11:03:16 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, tglx <tglx@...utronix.de>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: set_cpus_allowed_ptr Hi, Would it make sense to clean up the set_cpus_allowed() vs set_cpus_allowed_ptr() mess using the semantic patch tool? I guess it would be three patches: 1) converting the current remaining set_cpus_allowed() users into set_cpus_allowed_ptr(). 2) remove set_cpus_allowed(). 3) rename set_cpus_allowed_ptr() to set_cpus_allowed() -- 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