linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] stub out is_swap

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]

Message-Id: <200802081625.12893.vapier@gentoo.org>
Date:	Fri, 8 Feb 2008 16:25:12 -0500
From:	Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
To:	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] stub out is_swap_pte for !MMU

On Friday 08 February 2008, Matt Mackall wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-02-08 at 15:02 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > With commit 698dd4ba6b12e34e1e432c944c01478c0b2cd773, swap_pte() was
> > moved into view of both MMU and !MMU, but uses functions only provided by
> > MMU. Here we stub out the function for !MMU ports.
>
> I'm not sure if this is right compared to my original patch. Does it
> ever make sense to ask "is this pte a swap entry?" on a machine with no
> MMU? Presumably this also means it has no ptes too, right? In which
> case, it's better to comment the whole function out. Then when someone
> tries to ask the above meaningless question, they get a compile error
> rather than a meaningless answer.

honestly, doesnt matter to me since none of the code that currently utilizes 
this function is used in no-mmu context.  if you want to just put the whole 
thing in CONFIG_MMU, then go for it.
-mike

Download attachment "signature.asc " of type "application/pgp-signature" (828 bytes)