| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20070831140332.GB14130@parisc-linux.org> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 08:03:33 -0600 From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx> To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>, Satyam Sharma <satyam@...radead.org>, Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] trivial - constify sched.h On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 02:53:23PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 10:55:49PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > "those callers". There was _exactly one_ caller, and that was an out-of-tree > > module. There were not any in-kernel callers before, and it did not generate > > any warning. That is perhaps why no one had constified it before me. This does > > not mean we should wait for a caller to pop up before constifying IMHO. > > In this case we should just kill it instead of messing with constness. I think Jan mis-spoke -- there were no in-kernel callers calling it with a const argument. -- Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step." - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists