linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] percpu: remove this_cpu

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: <20131027130415.GA30307@mtj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Sun, 27 Oct 2013 09:04:15 -0400
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] percpu: remove this_cpu_xor()

On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 01:25:35PM +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> While optimizing and testing s390's this_cpu ops I realized that
> this_cpu_xor() generates broken code ("or" instead of "xor").
> 
> Since there is not a single user in the whole kernel tree it seems
> to be a good opportunity to simply remove it instead of fixing it.
> 
> These two patches only remove the generic and x86 variant. It doesn't
> touch s390 since it would only generate a merge conflict later on.
> I will take care of s390 anyway if the consensus is that it should be
> removed.
> 
> Heiko Carstens (2):
>   percpu: remove this_cpu_xor() implementation
>   x86: remove this_cpu_xor() implementation

Applied to percpu/for-3.13.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/