linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/46] kernel: Add prototype definition to include/linux/kernel.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: <20140227120439.260e5a6b@gandalf.local.home>
Date:	Thu, 27 Feb 2014 12:04:39 -0500
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
Cc:	Rashika Kheria <rashika.kheria@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Alex Elder <alex.elder@...aro.org>,
	Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@...il.com>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>,
	Andre Naujoks <nautsch2@...il.com>,
	Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	Alex Thorlton <athorlton@....com>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/46] kernel: Add prototype definition to
 include/linux/kernel.h

[ Dropped Chen Gang, Tony Lu, Chris Metcalf and Robin Holt as their
  emails are bouncing for me ]

On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 08:43:36 -0800
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org> wrote:
 
> > > +void __weak panic_smp_self_stop(void);
> > 
> > Is __weak required in a prototype? What about the override that is not
> > weak.
> 
> That's a good question.  It's definitely not required, and should be
> dropped.  What I don't know is if it's broken to include it: does it
> make the non-weak definition weak?

I don't think so, but it is inconsistent. Best to not include it in the
prototype. This is a clean up patch after all. Lets not clean up one
thing and make something else messy in the process.

-- Steve
--
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/