linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: stop checking for CONFIG

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 18 Mar 2013 16:42:11 +0100
From:	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
To:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:	Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: stop checking for CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL

On Sat, 2013-03-16 at 15:38 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> Hrm, I actually think it would be better to change this to ERROR
> instead of WARN.

I figured the main reason to add this warning was to prevent people to
add dependencies on EXPERIMENTAL while you were cleaning the tree, which
could mean you had to redo patches each time that happened.

Anyhow, with EXPERIMENTAL gone, this is just one of the mistakes people
can make in using the kconfig system. I'm not sure that we should use
checkpatch to catch these. For this particular case it must also be
noted that if code gets in while still depending on EXPERIMENTAL someone
also missed that this code doesn't get build at all.

Paul Bolle

--
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/