| 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: <20101016075447.GE19147@amd> Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 18:54:47 +1100 From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk> To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> Cc: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/17] fs: Factor inode hash operations into functions On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 02:06:07AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 10:18:43PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de> > > > > Before we can replace the inode hash locking with a more scalable > > mechanism, we need to remove external users of the inode_hash_lock. > > Make it private by adding a function __remove_inode_hash that can be > > called by filesystems instead of open-coding their own inode hash > > removal operations. > > I like the factoring, but this changelog is misleading. At least in > this series no new user of __remove_inode_hash appears, and I'm not sure > where it would appear anyway. Just making the function global without > actually exporting it is not helping external filesystems anyway. For > now it can simply be made static. Yeah, hugetlbfs was using this a while back as I said, and I've missed refactoring it. Will do. -- 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