linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/15] tick: Remove useless oneshot ifdeffery

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]

Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2024 10:40:10 +0100
From: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>, LKML
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner
 <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Peng Liu
 <liupeng17@...ovo.com>, Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/15] tick: Remove useless oneshot ifdeffery

Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org> writes:

> tick-sched.c is only built when CONFIG_TICK_ONESHOT=y, which is selected
> only if CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON=y or CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS=y. Therefore
> the related ifdeferry in this file is needless and can be removed.
>
> Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>

It's a nitpick, but shouldn't the ordering of sob and reviewed-by be the
other way round?

Thanks,

	Anna-Maria