linux-kernel - why do we need atomic_set

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

Date:	Mon, 27 May 2013 00:47:03 -0700 (PDT)
From:	johnspaul92 <johns@...com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: why do we need atomic_set_unchecked

When i tried to apply the GrSecurity patch on linux kernel 3.10 and there the
patch actually modifies atomic_set to atomic_set_unchecked. When i checked
the gcc patch to compile this code it just redefines atomic_set as
atomic_set_unchecked. So what is the use of changing the function name.?? Am
I missing something here(i.e have they given a new definition for this
function anywhere else). And i would also like to know what this
function(atomic_set_unchecked. I know about the atomic_set function)  is
used for.

--
View this message in context: http://linux-kernel.2935.n7.nabble.com/why-do-we-need-atomic-set-unchecked-tp656004.html
Sent from the Linux Kernel mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
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/