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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 16:47:47 -0700 From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> Cc: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, davem@...emloft.net, rostedt@...dmis.org, mingo@...e.hu, ebiederm@...ssion.com, aarcange@...hat.com, ericvh@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC v2 1/7] hashtable: introduce a small and naive hashtable On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote: > > I suppose you mean unsized. I remember this working. Maybe I'm > confusing it with zero-sized array. Hmm... gcc doesn't complain about > the following. --std=c99 seems happy too. Ok, I'm surprised, but maybe it's supposed to work if you do it inside another struct like that, exactly so that you can preallocate things.. Or maybe it's just a gcc bug. I do think this all is way hackier than Sasha's original simple code that didn't need these kinds of games, and didn't need a size member at all. I really think all the extra complexity and overhead is just *bad*. The first simple version was much nicer and likely generated better code too. Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists