linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] net: convert lls to use time_in

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]

Date:	Tue, 02 Jul 2013 23:28:00 +0300
From:	Eliezer Tamir <eliezer.tamir@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, willemb@...gle.com, erdnetdev@...il.com,
	andi@...stfloor.org, hpa@...or.com, devel-lists@...yps.com,
	eliezer@...ir.org.il
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] net: convert lls to use time_in_range()

On 02/07/2013 23:10, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-07-02 at 12:49 +0300, Eliezer Tamir wrote:
>> Time in range will fail safely if we move to a different cpu with an
>> extremely large clock skew.
>> Add time_in_range64() and convert lls to use it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eliezer Tamir <eliezer.tamir@...ux.intel.com>
>> ---
>> v1->v2
>> fixed double call to sched_clock() in can_poll_ll(), checkpatchisms

>> +#define time_in_range64(a, b, c) \
>> +	(time_after_eq64(a, b) && \
>> +	 time_before_eq64(a, c))
> [...]
>
> Why not make this an inline function, so the caller doesn't need to
> worry about repeated evaluation?

I was following the conventions in jiffies.h
(well almost, I did add a few spaces to make checkpatch happy)
--
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/