linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: more header fixes

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: <20080722113823.GA9351@elte.hu>
Date:	Tue, 22 Jul 2008 13:38:23 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: more header fixes

* Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 12:36 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> >> I've updated my script to also fix any rogue uses of header-guard
> >> names in auxiliary files. I'm attaching the resulting patch.
> >>
> >> It doesn't really _fix_ the hideous hack, it merely unbreaks it.
> >>
> >> Patch #2 also fixes some left-over headers. They both apply on top of
> >> tip/x86/header-guards.
> >
> > looks good - do you have a branch i could pull into
> > tip/x86/header-guards?
> 
> I've pushed it to the 'for-tip' branch of
> 
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vegard/linux-2.6-headers.git
> 
> (Note that since you rebased the same branch last time, I just applied 
> my patches on top of _your_ branch and pushed that to above location.)
> 
> Though I still believe it should be squashed for bisectability.

hm, i pulled it but 1ab9e368 cannot be squashed into aa27f9586 cleanly.

I'd suggest the following approach, which we used for the scripted 
unification of arch/x86. Do a couple of preparatory patches that just 
bring all the header guards into proper shape. _Then_ run the script 
against that "prepared" tree. The end result should be correct to the 
best of our current knowledge. (i'll figure out any remaining build 
breakages quickly - i can build 120+ random kernels per hour)

We can rebase x86/header-guards to such a bisectable approach no problem 
if you can do it like that, it's not yet merged anywhere. Just send me a 
pull URI that i'll pull into a x86/header-guards that is reset back to 
linus/master.

Can you see any complications with that approach?

	Ingo
--
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/