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  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]
Date:	Sun, 04 Apr 2010 16:56:11 +0900
From:	Hitoshi Mitake <>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <>
CC:	Frederic Weisbecker <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>, Jason Baron <>,
	Steven Rostedt <>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <>,,,
	Paul Mackerras <>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <>,
	Jens Axboe <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 00/11] lock monitor: Separate features related to

On 03/24/10 00:32, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
 > On Sat, 2010-03-20 at 17:23 +0900, Hitoshi Mitake wrote:
 >> In lockdep, held_locks of task_struct are accessed this arithmetical way
 >>                  prev = curr->held_locks + i;
 >> Of course this is valid way, but I feel it is more simple and 
natural way
 >>                  prev = curr->held_locks[i];
 > The latter is a type mis-match, an equivalent expression would be:
 >     &curr->held_locks[i];

Yeah, sorry.

And is there reason that the statement is not
     prev = curr->held_locks + i;

Of course, curr->held_locks + i style statement causes no problem.
But I had a little interest in the selection of style.
Do you know the reason?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists