mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: Jesper Juhl <juhl-lkml@dif.dk>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Ian Molton <spyro@f2s.com>,
	Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@au.ibm.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
	Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][0/10] verify_area cleanup
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 11:56:11 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050313195611.GE15648@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0503040247220.2801@dragon.hygekrogen.localhost>

On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 03:47:07AM +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> Now that 2.6.11 is out the door it's time to try and submit this again.
> The following patches convert all users of verify_area to access_ok and 
> the final patch then deprecates verify_area acros all archs with the 
> intention of removing it completely later. These patches get rid of 99+% 
> of all users, there's still one or two macros left using it and there are 
> still a few comments left refering to it that could be cleaned up - I'll 
> get to those, but what remains after these patches is extremely little.
> The reason for doing this is that verify_area is just a wrapper for 
> access_ok anyway, so there's no good reason to keep it around - access_ok 
> also seems more readable anyway with saner return values.
> Since these patches touch things all over the tree the CC list would be 
> enormous if I CC'd everyone involved on all patches, so I'll just CC this 
> initial mail to a few key people I think are relevant (I hope I got that 
> list right), and the actual patches I'll just send to linux-kernel and 
> Andrew (or directly to people who ask for that).

The execution at first glance appears good. Out of curiosity, does this
serve a larger purpose than eliminating a redundant API?


-- wli

  reply	other threads:[~2005-03-13 20:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-03-04  2:47 Jesper Juhl
2005-03-13 19:56 ` William Lee Irwin III [this message]
2005-03-13 22:03   ` Jesper Juhl

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20050313195611.GE15648@holomorphy.com \
    --to=wli@holomorphy.com \
    --cc=ak@suse.de \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=juhl-lkml@dif.dk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matthew@wil.cx \
    --cc=paulus@au.ibm.com \
    --cc=rmk@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=rth@twiddle.net \
    --cc=spyro@f2s.com \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®