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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sun, 30 May 2010 10:43:03 +1000
From:	Stephen Rothwell <>
To:	Linus Torvalds <>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <>,,,
	Jack Steiner <>,
	Lee Schermerhorn <>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure in Linus' tree

Hi Linus,

On Thu, 27 May 2010 18:09:17 -0700 (PDT) Linus Torvalds <> wrote:
> On Fri, 28 May 2010, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > 
> > Caused by commit 0ac0c0d0f837c499afd02a802f9cf52d3027fa3b ("cpusets:
> > randomize node rotor used in cpuset_mem_spread_node()").
> > 
> > This commit assumes that __node_random() exists if (MAX_NUMNODES > 1) and
> > uses it if CONFIG_CPUSETS is set, but only creates it for x86 ...  there
> > is at least one other architecture where those conditions are true.
> Yeah, looking at that, it seems totally idiotic.
> Why is that "__node_random()" in x86 code at all? There is absolutely 
> nothing x86 about it that I can tell. And now I have an ia64 merge that 
> just duplicates that moronic function.

So, is it reasonable for me to ask you to revert commit
0ac0c0d0f837c499afd02a802f9cf52d3027fa3b ("cpusets: randomize node rotor
used in cpuset_mem_spread_node()")?  Reverting it won't break ia64 (since
their fix was to just add code that would then be unreferenced).

Stephen Rothwell          

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists