Re: Dangerous code in cpumask_of_cpu?

[Rusty Russell]

On Tuesday 08 July 2008 18:54:38 Johannes Weiner wrote:
> Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > But then, this code should probably just evaluate to m without this
> > obscure *(&m) construct.
>
> This, however is still possible, no?

Unfortunately this change was specifically made in the changeset I refered to, 
so that the &cpumask_of_cpu() could be passed :(

Cheers,
Rusty.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/