linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] atomic64_test: Simplify the #ifdef for atomic64_dec_if

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20120718151037.4692fa85.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2012 15:10:37 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, linux390@...ibm.com,
	x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] atomic64_test: Simplify the #ifdef for
 atomic64_dec_if_positive() test

On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 18:10:48 +0100
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com> wrote:

> This patch introduces CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_ATOMIC64_DEC_IF_POSITIVE and uses
> this instead of the multitude of #if defined() checks in atomic64_test.c
> 
> ...
>
> --- a/lib/atomic64_test.c
> +++ b/lib/atomic64_test.c
> @@ -114,8 +114,7 @@ static __init int test_atomic64(void)
>  	r += one;
>  	BUG_ON(v.counter != r);
>  
> -#if defined(CONFIG_X86) || defined(CONFIG_MIPS) || defined(CONFIG_PPC) || \
> -    defined(CONFIG_S390) || defined(_ASM_GENERIC_ATOMIC64_H) || defined(CONFIG_ARM)

ugh, good riddance.

> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_ATOMIC64_DEC_IF_POSITIVE

The alternative way of doing this is to do

#define atomic64_dec_if_positive atomic64_dec_if_positive

in all the relevant .h files, then use #ifdef atomic64_dec_if_positive.
That's rather nice because it keeps everything in one place.  otoh it
is rather unobvious trickery.

But either way is better than what we have now.
--
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/