linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/22] s390: introduce little endian bitops

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <AANLkTi=H+c0drWP20JhSs74+V3q2aChgTA1L86pT=FzH@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:51:52 +0900
From:	Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
	linux390@...ibm.com, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/22] s390: introduce little endian bitops

2010/10/15 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>:
> On Friday 15 October 2010, Akinobu Mita wrote:
>> +#define __set_le_bit(nr, addr) \
>> +       __set_bit((nr)^(__BITOPS_WORDSIZE - 8), (addr))
>> +#define __clear_le_bit(nr, addr)       \
>> +       __clear_bit((nr)^(__BITOPS_WORDSIZE - 8), (addr))
>> +#define __test_and_set_le_bit(nr, addr)        \
>> +       __test_and_set_bit((nr)^(__BITOPS_WORDSIZE - 8), (addr))
>> +#define test_and_set_le_bit(lock, nr, addr)    \
>> +       test_and_set_bit((nr)^(__BITOPS_WORDSIZE - 8), (addr))
>> +#define __test_and_clear_le_bit(nr, addr)      \
>> +       __test_and_clear_bit((nr)^(__BITOPS_WORDSIZE - 8), (addr))
>> +#define test_and_clear_le_bit(lock, nr, addr)  \
>> +       test_and_clear_bit((nr)^(__BITOPS_WORDSIZE - 8), (addr))
>> +#define test_le_bit(nr, addr)  \
>> +       test_bit((nr)^(__BITOPS_WORDSIZE - 8), (addr))
>
> The test_and_clear_le_bit and test_and_set_le_bit calling conventions
> are a little surprising here. I would not pass the lock argument
> here but leave that to the ext2 wrapper:
>
> #define test_and_set_le_bit(nr, addr)    \
>       test_and_set_bit((nr)^(__BITOPS_WORDSIZE - 8), (addr))
> #define test_and_clear_le_bit(nr, addr)  \
>       test_and_clear_bit((nr)^(__BITOPS_WORDSIZE - 8), (addr))
>
> #define ext2_set_bit_atomic(lock, nr, addr)       \
>       test_and_set_le_bit((nr), (unsigned long *)(addr))
> #define ext2_clear_bit_atomic(lock, nr, addr)     \
>       test_and_clear_le_bit((nr), (unsigned long *)(addr))
>
> Same thing on arm and m68k.

Oops,
test_and_{set,clear}_le_bit() is only used by ext2_{set,clear}_bit_atomic
and I had one additional patch that cleans up these definisions across
the architectures. So I didn't realize that mistake when I did cross
compile.
--
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/