linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Return a value from printk

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: <1411314785.2952.8.camel@joe-AO725>
Date:	Sun, 21 Sep 2014 08:53:05 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	Alan Jenkins <alan-jenkins@...fmail.co.uk>
Cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Omar Sandoval <osandov@...ndov.com>, Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
	Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Return a value from printk_ratelimited

On Sun, 2014-09-21 at 06:25 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:15:53AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-09-19 at 13:21 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Fri, 19 Sep 2014 02:01:29 -0700
> > > Omar Sandoval <osandov@...ndov.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > printk returns an integer; there's no reason for printk_ratelimited to swallow
> > > > it.
> > 
> > Except for the lack of usefulness of the return value itself.
> > See: https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/10/7/275
> 
> When printk()'s return value is changed to void, then yes, we should
> clearly change this code to match that.
> 
> So, I have to ask...  What happened to the patch later in that series
> that was to remove the uses of the printk() return value?

I don't know.

Last I recall via searching emails, Alan Jenkins was going to do
something with it. (I've added his old email to this reply, but
I doubt still works)

I remember checking whether or not the removing the return value
reduced the code size on x86 (it did not), and forgot about it.

I don't know if removing the printk return value reduces overall
image size in any arch, so I didn't pursue it.

--
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/