linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] powerpc: Move idle_loop_prolog()/epilog() functions to header file

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: <87tv31jtv2.fsf@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Fri, 06 Mar 2020 11:06:25 -0600
From:   Nathan Lynch <nathanl@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Tyrel Datwyler <tyreld@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] powerpc: Move idle_loop_prolog()/epilog() functions to header file

Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 09:03:16AM -0600, Nathan Lynch wrote:
>> Looks fine and correct as a cleanup, but asm/include/idle.h and
>> idle_loop_prolog, idle_loop_epilog, strike me as too generic for
>> pseries-specific code.
>
> Should it be prefixed with pseries , i.e pseries_idle_prolog()
> and pseries_idle_epilog() ?

Yes that seems appropriate to me.