linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 06/16] tracepoint: use new hashtable implementation

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: <CA+1xoqdi2pQENa=--FkPbOGOHgK+M26_jNCxGTkFiynqnR+7og@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 29 Oct 2012 15:17:16 -0400
From:	Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, davem@...emloft.net,
	rostedt@...dmis.org, mingo@...e.hu, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	aarcange@...hat.com, ericvh@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	eric.dumazet@...il.com, axboe@...nel.dk, agk@...hat.com,
	dm-devel@...hat.com, neilb@...e.de, ccaulfie@...hat.com,
	teigland@...hat.com, Trond.Myklebust@...app.com,
	bfields@...ldses.org, fweisbec@...il.com, jesse@...ira.com,
	venkat.x.venkatsubra@...cle.com, ejt@...hat.com,
	snitzer@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
	dev@...nvswitch.org, rds-devel@....oracle.com, lw@...fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 06/16] tracepoint: use new hashtable implementation

On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 03:09:36PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> The other thing is whether hash_init() should be called for hashtables
>> that were created with DEFINE_HASHTABLE(). That point was raised by
>> Neil Brown last time this series went around, and it seems that no one
>> objected to the point that it should be consistent across the code.
>
> Hmmm?  If something is DEFINE_XXX()'d, you definitely shouldn't be
> calling XXX_init() on it.  That's how it is with most other abstract
> data types and you need *VERY* strong rationale to deviate from that.

Neil Brown raised that point last time that this series went around,
and suggested that this should be consistent and hash_init() would
appear everywhere, even if DEFINE_HASHTABLE() was used. Since no one
objected to that I thought we're going with that.

I'll chalk it up to me getting confused :)


Thanks,
Sasha
--
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/