linux-kernel - Re: [PULL] typesafe callbacks for kthread and stop

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]

Date:	Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:06:43 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Bert Wesarg <bert.wesarg@...glemail.com>,
	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [PULL] typesafe callbacks for kthread and stop_machine

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 02:52:35PM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Just the two places I look after.  And this time the conglomerate patch is
> included below for more random commentry.

I must say I personally don't like the wrapper macros that you require
for each function that uses this. A wrapper macro has a large impact
on code readability because everyone following a call chain has
to do an additional grep/open file etc. step. I have my doubts not having casts 
outweights that disadvantage.

I know that gcc has this funky transparent union extension that
glibc socket() uses to allow different address types without casts.
It has the advantage of not needing wrapper macros. Any chance of 
using that instead? Or has that one been considered already and
discarded? 

-Andi
--
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/