[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170225152221.v7yah6d25scxaijf@thunk.org>
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2017 10:22:21 -0500
From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To: bosrsf04@...il.com
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>,
Parav Pandit <pandit.parav@...il.com>,
"seokhoon . yoon" <iamyooon@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
josh@...htriplett.org, brkkurek192@...il.com, conorcurry@...il.com,
fanofbond138@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] fs: Extracts pivot_root so it can be made optional
If you're only going to be removing a single function, instead of
having to export a bunch of previously-static functions, my preference
would be to just insert a pair of #ifdef CONFIG_PIVOT_ROOT_SYSCALL / #endif
statements around the function in question.
Is it worth it to save 600-odd bytes? Shrug; but if that's what you
are after, I'd suggest doing it the simplest and least-instrusive way
possible.
Cheers,
- Ted
Powered by blists - more mailing lists