| 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: <4C1F8366.70306@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 17:21:10 +0200 From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com> To: Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@...a.org.au> CC: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>, rjw@...k.pl, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 1/9] PM / Hibernate: swap, switch to hibernate_io_handle On 06/11/2010 11:46 AM, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > On 02/06/10 18:52, Jiri Slaby wrote: >> I addressed the comments I got on the previous RFC. I left the handles >> in place, the functions in hibernate_io_ops now works on them. Further >> I got rid of the memory barriers and minimized global variables as much >> as possible. Comments welcome. > > I would like to hear the arguments for using these handles. I understand > there may have been some previous discussion, but am unable to find it. > > It seems far more sensible to me to not pass around a handle that > virtually nothing actually uses, and instead store and utilise the state > in the place where it is actually useful. If we had more than one struct > hibernate_io_handle in use at a time, I could understand going this way. > As it stands, however... Hi, it I added that based on this: http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/3/24/458 -- js -- 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