linux-kernel - Re: Final per cpu consistency patch for -next or late in 3.19 merge period

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: <20141202171102.GC10918@htj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Tue, 2 Dec 2014 12:11:02 -0500
From:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Final per cpu consistency patch for -next or late in 3.19 merge
 period

On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 10:57:50AM -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Dec 2014, Tejun Heo wrote:
> 
> > Can you please update Documentation/local_ops.txt and comments which
> > contain __get_cpu_var() and send the updated patch to Andrew?
> 
> Owww.... local_* ops are exotic operations that should no longer be
> regularly used. This_cpu ops create less overhead and
> are simpler to use. Lets merge the prior patch as is and then add this
> documentation patch which may cause some additional discussion.

Sure, I just wanna make sure we don't have dangling references to
__get_cpu_var() which no longer exists.  There are also a couple
places where comment text refers to it.  Let's please take care of
them too.

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/