linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] extable.h: add stddef.h so "NULL" definition is not implicit

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <878twmz4rk.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
Date:	Thu, 28 Jul 2016 15:24:39 +0930
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] extable.h: add stddef.h so "NULL" definition is not implicit

Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com> writes:
> While not an issue now, eventually we will have independent users of
> the extable.h file and we will stop sourcing it via module.h header.
>
> In testing that pending work, with very sparse builds, characteristic
> of an "allnoconfig" on various architectures, we can sometimes hit an
> instance where the very basic standard definitions aren't present,
> resulting in:
>
>  include/linux/extable.h:26:9: error: 'NULL' undeclared (first use in this function)
>
> To be clear, this isn't a regression, since currently extable.h is
> only used by module.h -- however, we will need this addition present
> before we start migrating exception table users off module.h and onto
> extable.h during the next release cycle.
>
> Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
> Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
> ---
>
> [Was not expecting extable.h to be in 4.8 content, but since it is, it
>  might as well have this one line fixup to make it ready for 4.9 ; feel
>  free to squash this into the original extable.h creation if rebasing.]

Applied.  I prefer not to rebase published trees, and it's not like it's
going to break anyone's bisect.

Thanks,
Rusty.