linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] remove implicit slab.h inclusion from percpu.h

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: <20100311174821.GA5123@x200>
Date:	Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:48:22 +0200
From:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] remove implicit slab.h inclusion from percpu.h

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:56:22PM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Lee Schermerhorn was trying to use percpu from slab.h and ran into a
> dependency loop.  percpu.h was using slab.h for UP inline
> implementation which isn't a big deal in itself but it turns out that
> percpu.h ends up being included everywhere via module.h and sched.h.
> So, removing that implicit inclusion breaks a lot of files.
> 
> The following git tree contains trial conversion on x86_64.
> allmodconfig builds fine on it but a lot of other archs are likely to
> break although fixing them up shouldn't be too hard.
> 
>   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/percpu.git review-remove-implied-slab-inclusion
> 
> This can be solved much easier by moving some of the stuff that's
> necessary for slab.h from percpu.h into percpu-defs.h which originally
> got separated so that it can be used by asm/percpu.h but it's hackish
> and for longer term, it would be better to have slab.h explicitly
> included where necessary.
> 
> So, what do you guys think?  Probably-the-right-thing-to-do >544 file
> patch or somewhat-ugly-but-let's-worry-about-it-tommorrow two file
> patch?

You can include slab.h only for UP case.

Since everyone tests on allmodconfig which has SMP=y, configuration
will be more strict wrt headers, and compile breakages amount
negligible.
--
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/