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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2013 19:17:59 +0200 From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> To: Florian Fainelli <florian@...nwrt.org> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "alexandre.belloni" <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>, kernel <kernel@...gutronix.de>, "shawn.guo" <shawn.guo@...aro.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] net: phy: prevent linking breakage On Tuesday 04 June 2013 17:09:26 Florian Fainelli wrote: > You would just need to define a stub for your arch_foo_phy_fixup() > which has a different definition depending on whether CONFIG_PHYLIB is > defined or not. Yes, same thing. For a function that is called in only one place, I would always prefer if(IS_ENABLED()) over a stub though. > This would be just one function, instead of the whole bunch of stubs > needed for phylib. Right now its probably 1 vs 3, so it does not make > that much of a difference but who knows, if we had more phylib stubs > and forget to update the stubs? (which tends to happen pretty often). > > The size savings are exactly the same in both approaches anyway. So should we just stick to the current method then and use if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NET)) for calling the function? Arnd -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists