linux-kernel - Re: [build failure] Re: BKL: remove extraneous #include <smp

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: <AANLkTikV+KVmwKg4jS2KPG+9EFdd9qD-VUak4qOgFgr4@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 18 Nov 2010 08:02:58 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [build failure] Re: BKL: remove extraneous #include <smp_lock.h>

On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> How painful would it be to move lock_depth into thread_struct? I guess
> we don't have anything that cares about structure offsets in assembly
> for that thing.  I should just try.

Gaah, the only generic field there is the restart_block, so we'd have
to hide it there, or then add it to each architecture. So scratch
that.

I guess this is the simplest approach.

                         Linus

View attachment "patch.diff" of type "text/x-patch" (484 bytes)