Re: [patch 46/61] lock validator: special locking: slab

On Mon, 29 May 2006 23:26:49 +0200
Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:

> +		/*
> +		 * Do not assume that spinlocks can be initialized via memcpy:
> +		 */

I'd view that as something which should be fixed in mainline.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [patch 46/61] lock validator: special locking: slab
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [patch 00/61] ANNOUNCE: lock validator -V1
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
  • [patch 46/61] lock validator: special locking: slab
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [patch 50/61] lock validator: special locking: hrtimer.c
• Next by Date: Re: [patch 59/61] lock validator: special locking: xfrm
• Previous by thread: [patch 46/61] lock validator: special locking: slab
• Next by thread: Re: [patch 46/61] lock validator: special locking: slab
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]