linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] closures: move to lib/

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]

Message-ID: <20131219152701.GC16994@htj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Thu, 19 Dec 2013 10:27:01 -0500
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] closures: move to lib/

Hello,

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 04:05:16AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 05:29:54PM -0800, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > the closure code was never intended to be bcache specific - hopefully it can be
> > useful elsewhere in the kernel.
> 
> They are not.  They aren't closures in the CS sense, and they are an
> ugly mess.  Please work on removing them instead.

I pretty much agree with Christoph here.  Compared to all other
generic utilities we have, the proposed mechanism is giant in its
conceptual complexity.  This is a lot worse than semaphores.  I
personally think inclusion of it in the upstream kernel at all was a
bad idea.

 Nacked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>

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/