linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Introduce __ARCH_WANT_SYS

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: <87a5b0800804240218l3e907acah438dded122cdec33@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:18:34 +0100
From:	"Will Newton" <will.newton@...il.com>
To:	"Mike Frysinger" <vapier.adi@...il.com>
Cc:	"Kyle McMartin" <kyle@...artin.ca>,
	"Randy Dunlap" <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	"Linux Kernel list" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Introduce __ARCH_WANT_SYS_SYSFS

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 6:59 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@...il.com> wrote:
>  > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 11:50 AM, Will Newton <will.newton@...il.com> wrote:
>  >  > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 4:40 PM, Kyle McMartin <kyle@...artin.ca> wrote:
>  >  >  > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 03:36:23PM +0100, Will Newton wrote:
>  >  >  >  > +config ARCH_HAS_SYS_SYSFS
>  >  >  >  > +     bool
>  >  >  >  > +     default y
>  >  >  >  > +
>  >  >  >  >  source "init/Kconfig"
>  >  >  >  >
>  >  >  >
>  >  >  >  Sorry, I meant something more like
>  >  >  >
>  >  >  >
>  >  >  >  config ARCH_HAS_SYS_SYSFS
>  >  >  >         def_bool !BLACKFIN
>  >  >  >         help
>  >  >  >           Obsolete sys_sysfs syscall
>  >  >  >
>  >  >  >  in init/Kconfig
>  >  >  >
>  >  >  >  But, it's your patch, you can do it however you like. :)
>  >  >
>  >  >  That's definitely shorter - but it feels a bit more like #ifdef
>  >  >  CONFIG_BLACKFIN which is explicitly what I don't want to do, because
>  >  >  I'm not actually interested in blackfin. ;-)
>  >
>  >  i'd have to agree that updating asm/unistd.h fits better with existing
>  >  paradigm.  if we want to talk about converting *all cases* to Kconfig,
>  >  we can do it in a separate thread.  splitting the design between two
>  >  different files is simply confusing to everyone involved as they spend
>  >  their time going "well which way am *i* supposed to do it".
>
>  thinking about this some more ... we actually have three choices here,
>  not just two.  checksyscalls.sh introduced a new form in asm/unistd.h:
>  #define __IGNORE_sysfs
>  perhaps we should be unifying the __ARCH_WANT_XXX and the __IGNORE_XXX

I'm not sure this would be possible. IGNORE is saying "please don't
warn me about the fact that I don't define define this syscall".
ARCH_WANT is saying "give me the generic implementation of this
syscall". You should never define IGNORE and ARCH_WANT for the same
syscall, but you may want to have neither - you have defined the
syscall but you don't want the generic version.

>  -mike
>
--
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/