| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <54298287.6020806@codethink.co.uk> Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 17:02:15 +0100 From: Rob Jones <rob.jones@...ethink.co.uk> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...ethink.co.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fs: proc: use __seq_open_private() On 12/09/14 22:54, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 15:09:37 +0100 Rob Jones <rob.jones@...ethink.co.uk> wrote: > >> Reduce boilerplate code by using __seq_open_private() instead of seq_open(). > > http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/fs-proc-task_nommuc-change-maps_open-to-use-__seq_open_private.patch > already did this. This duplicated only half of my submission, patch 2/2 did a similar operation on a different file (fs/proc/task_mmu.c). https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/12/347 Is that one actually going in (with Andrew's rename to include the file name) or should I resubmit it on its own? -- Rob Jones Codethink Ltd mailto:rob.jones@...ethink.co.uk tel:+44 161 236 5575 -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists