linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] lib/decompress_*: only include <linux/slab.h> if STATIC is not defined

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:57:03 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Phillip Lougher <phillip@...gher.demon.co.uk>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Albin Tonnerre <albin.tonnerre@...e-electrons.com>,
	sam@...nborg.org, linux@....linux.org.uk, alain@...ff.lu,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] lib/decompress_*: only include <linux/slab.h> if
 STATIC is not defined

On 08/04/2009 05:47 PM, Phillip Lougher wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Mon,  3 Aug 2009 16:58:16 +0200
>> Albin Tonnerre <albin.tonnerre@...e-electrons.com> wrote:
>>
>>> These includes were added by 079effb6933f34b9b1b67b08bd4fd7fb672d16ef to
>>> fix the build when using kmemtrace. However this is not necessary when
>>> used to create a compressed kernel, and actually creates issues (brings
>>> a lot of things unavailable in the decompression environment), so don't
>>> include it if STATIC is defined.
>>>
>>
>> The description "actually creates issues (brings a lot of things
>> unavailable in the decompression environment)" is inadequate.  Please
>> describe te problem this patch fixes more completely so that others
>> (ie: me) can decide whether this patch is needed in 2.6.32, 2.6.31.
>> 2.6.30, ...
>>
>> This patch conflicts heavily with
>>
>> http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/bzip2-lzma-remove-nasty-uncompressed-size-hack-in-pre-boot-environment.patch
>>
>> What should we do about that?
> 
> 
> What do you normally do in this situation?  I'm happy to send a revised
> bzip2-lzma-remove-nasty-uncompressed-size-hack-in-pre-boot-environment.patch
> 
> that would apply cleanly on-top of Alvin's patch, but, this will obviously
> create dependencies on his patch being applied.
> 

The general principle is that if A alone creates a more functional
environment than B alone, then B should be applied on top of A, and vice
versa.  This is especially so if A is a stable candidate.

It *sounds* like your patch is B here, but I am not sure from the
description.

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