linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] epoll: use wrapper functions

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: <o2l412e6f7f1005061948u1ca0fe54of0b453846c678c85@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 7 May 2010 10:48:05 +0800
From:	Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Roland Dreier <rolandd@...co.com>,
	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] epoll: use wrapper functions

On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 11:47 -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote:
>> Since we already have __add_wait_queue(), __add_wait_queue_tail() and
>> __remove_wait_queue() (which all means "locked"), and while I agree in
>> having the exclusive-add wrapped into a function, I much better prefer a:
>>
>> static inline void __add_wait_queue_excl(wait_queue_head_t *head,
>>                                          wait_queue_t *new)
>> {
>>         new->flags |= WQ_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE;
>>         __add_wait_queue(head, new);
>> }
>>
>> The patch you posted introduces a different naming, which leaves all the
>> other __*() untouched, and wraps the already one-liner __remove_wait_queue()
>> with yet another one-liner.
>
> I concur, I always get confused by the _locked postfix (and its more
> typing). Also, it goes against the lock data not code paradigm.
>
>

I greped all the code, and found that
add_wait_queue_head_exclusive_locked() and remove_wait_queue_locked()
aren't used. It seems that no users like these APIs. So I will remove
these two APIs, and add __add_wait_queue_excl() instead. Thanks.


-- 
Regards，
Changli Gao(xiaosuo@...il.com)
--
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/