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  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]
Date:   Tue, 25 Sep 2018 10:57:22 -0700 (PDT)
From:   Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>
To:     andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com
CC:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, aou@...s.berkeley.edu,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject:     Re: [PATCH 1/2] riscv/bitops: Remove smp_mb__{before,after}_clear_bit()

On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 10:49:06 PDT (-0700), andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 10:19:24AM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>> On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 05:12:24 PDT (-0700), andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com wrote:
>> > The barriers are unused; remove their definition.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com>
>> > Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>
>> > Cc: Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>
>> > Cc: <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>
>> > ---
>> >  arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h | 5 -----
>> >  1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h
>> > index f30daf26f08f4..01db98dfd0435 100644
>> > --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h
>> > +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h
>> > @@ -23,11 +23,6 @@
>> >  #include <asm/barrier.h>
>> >  #include <asm/bitsperlong.h>
>> >
>> > -#ifndef smp_mb__before_clear_bit
>> > -#define smp_mb__before_clear_bit()  smp_mb()
>> > -#define smp_mb__after_clear_bit()   smp_mb()
>> > -#endif /* smp_mb__before_clear_bit */
>> > -
>> >  #include <asm-generic/bitops/__ffs.h>
>> >  #include <asm-generic/bitops/ffz.h>
>> >  #include <asm-generic/bitops/fls.h>
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>>
>> Do you want me to take this via the RISC-V tree?  I only ended up with patch
>> 1/2 in my inbox, and I probably shouldn't take both.
>
> I expected this to go via the RISC-V tree and 2/2 via the H8/300 tree,
> but really no preference from me as long as they get upstreamed. ;-)

Works for me.  I'll take this one.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists