linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 14/17] UAPI: Make linux/patchkey.h easier to parse

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: <12078.1323784677@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 13 Dec 2011 13:57:57 +0000
From:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	dhowells@...hat.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, arnd@...db.de,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/17] UAPI: Make linux/patchkey.h easier to parse

David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:

> > Is this part missing, or no longer needed?
> 
> It seems to have got lost somewhere.  Thanks for catching it.

Actually, it doesn't seem to be necessary.  The header splitter managed to cope
without it and did the right thing.  I think what happened was that the
splitter didn't recognise the _LINUX_PATCHKEY_H_INDIRECT thing as a reinclusion
guard, so it just tossed that into the UAPI header, then recognised the
_LINUX_PATCHKEY_H thing as the reinclusion guard and proceeded from there.

Would you prefer that I remove that from the comments or would you prefer that
I leave things unchanged?

David
--
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/