linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] headers

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:	Sun, 7 Jun 2009 00:24:15 +0100
From:	Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
Cc:	Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@...nel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Greg Ungerer <gerg@...pgear.com>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
	Michael Abbott <michael@...neidae.co.uk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] headers_check fixes

On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 12:12:23AM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> Hi Russell.
> 
> On Sat, Jun 06, 2009 at 10:47:11PM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> > Right, below is a patch to unifdef.c which allows it to work out if
> > an #if expression always evaluates true or false for symbols which
> > are being undefined/always defined.
> > 
> > The patch is slightly more complicated than I'd hoped because unifdef
> > needs to see lines fully evaluated - doing otherwise causes it to
> > mark the line as "dirty" and copy it over no matter what.
> > 
> > What follows this email is the diff of what effect it has on the
> > headers copied over - as can be seen, all resulting changes are of
> > net benefit.
> 
> You beat me on this one.
> I was looking into supportting short_circuit_and/short_circuit_or too.
> Your patch looks better - thanks!
> 
> >From my very limited testing this patch suffers from a problem I faced too.
> When you run it on for example hwcap.h or my sample file:
> #if defined(__KERNEL__) && !defined(__ASSEMBLY__)
>   int a;
> #endif
> 
> then the return code of the program is 1 so we do not copy the file.

That's correct.  If unifdef removes any lines, the exit code is 1, not
zero.  This happens with the unmodified unifdef as well, so I'm not
changing that behaviour.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:
--
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/