linux-kernel - Re: percpu: Define this_cpu_cpumask_var_t

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: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1408261631350.8819@gentwo.org>
Date:	Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:33:28 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Motohiro Kosaki <Motohiro.Kosaki@...fujitsu.com>,
	Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Subject: Re: percpu: Define this_cpu_cpumask_var_t_ptr

On Sat, 23 Aug 2014, Christoph Lameter wrote:

> On Sat, 23 Aug 2014, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> > Hello, Christoph.
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 12:43:25PM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > > It wont accept the wrong type since the this_cpu_* functions will do type
> > > checking.
> >
> > It should only accept cpumask_var_t but the macro version accepts
> > anything that this_cpu_*() can handle.
>
> Ah, Ok.

Ok I tried to change it to an inline function. The problem is the
cpumask.h is included very early. this_cpu ops require functionality
that is not available at that point. I think it cannot be more than a
macro unless we define it elsewhere.

Regarding naming:

this_cpu_ptr_cpumask_var()

is ok?

--
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/