Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 16 Aug 2004 16:19:49 +0200 | From | Takashi Iwai <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] [LSM] Rework LSM hooks |
| |
At Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:22:13 +0200, Kurt Garloff wrote: > > [1 <text/plain; us-ascii (quoted-printable)>] > On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 01:12:17PM -0700, Chris Wright wrote: > > * James Morris (jmorris@redhat.com) wrote: > > > On Tue, 10 Aug 2004, Chris Wright wrote: > > > > Is this new (i.e. you just did this)? It's basically the same result we > > > > had from a few years ago. > > > > > > Yes, did it today. > > > > Thanks, James. Since these are the only concrete numbers and they are > > in the noise, I see no compelling reason to change to unlikely(). > > Well, you may want to drop the unlikely if you dislike it.
It can be dependent on CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_BOOTPARAM_VALUE? (E.g. use unlikely() when it's 0)
Takashi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |