linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] remove 556 unneeded #includes of sched.h

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0612282211330.20531@gockel.physik3.uni-rostock.de>
Date:	Thu, 28 Dec 2006 22:18:12 +0100 (CET)
From:	Tim Schmielau <tim@...sik3.uni-rostock.de>
To:	Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove 556 unneeded #includes of sched.h

On Thu, 28 Dec 2006, Al Viro wrote:

> Uh-huh.  How much of build coverage have you got with it?

Well, as said in the patch description, I compiled alpha, arm, i386, ia64, 
mips, powerpc, and x86_64 with allnoconfig, defconfig, allmodconfig, and 
allyesconfig as well as a few randconfigs on x86_64. I also checked that 
no new warnings were introduced by the patch.

> Note that "doesn't use symbols defined in sched.h" != "can remove 
> include of sched.h", which, in turn, is not the same as "removing it 
> doesn't cause problems on a couple of configs I've tried on amd64".

Sure. But from my experience (I started posting these patches almost five 
years ago, inspired by a blog entry by davej) actually the only thing that 
prevents removing the sched.h include (other than using symbols defined 
there) is dereferencing current, which my scripts also check.

Tim
-
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/