linux-kernel - Re: [linux-cifs-client] Fwd: [PATCH] Fix CIFS compilation with CONFIG

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: <524f69650810121147j4ad79f77p348a3814b7f05d01@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 12 Oct 2008 13:47:12 -0500
From:	"Steve French" <smfrench@...il.com>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	"Jeff Layton" <jlayton@...hat.com>,
	"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	"samba-technical@...ts.samba.org" <samba-technical@...ts.samba.org>,
	"linux-cifs-client@...ts.samba.org" 
	<linux-cifs-client@...ts.samba.org>, cooldavid@...ldavid.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-cifs-client] Fwd: [PATCH] Fix CIFS compilation with CONFIG_KEYS unset

On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> On Sunday, 12 of October 2008, Steve French wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 11:53 AM, Steve French <smfrench@...il.com> wrote:
>> > On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 8:59 AM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com> wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:40:39 -0500
>> >> "Steve French" <smfrench@...il.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Actually, I like Adrian/Rafael's fix better. I think we should avoid
>> >> cluttering up the code with #ifdef's where possible. key_put() already
>> >> is a no-op when CONFIG_KEYS is disabled. We might as well do the same
>> >> thing with key_revoke().
>> > I don't think it matters much - but we probably shouldn't be
>> > overriding global functions.
>>
>> To clarify, I like fixing it in keys.h better than overriding it in
>> cifs, but in the meantime we need an ifdef in cifs until keys.h
>> changes.
>
> Well, adding an empty definition for key_revoke() in the !CONFIG_KEYS case
> makes sense anyway IMO.

I agree.  ACKED

-- 
Thanks,

Steve
--
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/