linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cifs: fix build on !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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20081012073037.20d399ee@tleilax.poochiereds.net>
Date:	Sun, 12 Oct 2008 07:30:37 -0400
From:	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	"Steven Noonan" <steven@...inklabs.net>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>, "Steve French" <sfrench@...ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cifs: fix build on !CONFIG_KEYS

On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 13:30:48 +0200
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:

> On Sunday, 12 of October 2008, Steven Noonan wrote:
> > Hmm, which fix is correct though? Depending on KEYS in Kconfig, or
> > adding a nop for it?
> 
> Well, according to git-blame the key_revoke() has been added to fs/cifs/sess.c
> only recently while key_put() was there before.  For this reason I think it's
> correct to handle key_revoke() in analogy with key_put(), ie. add an empty
> definition for it if CONFIG_KEYS is unset.
> 
> Thanks,
> Rafael
> 

Agreed. It should be possible to build CIFS w/o KEYS support. Adding an empty
key_revoke looks like the right thing to do. Looks like Adrian Bunk sent a
patch for this a few hours ago:

    Subject: [2.6 patch] add key_revoke() dummy for KEYS=n

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
--
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/