linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] sched.h split-up

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: <CA+55aFwaVo2-Q-23Fq25vfmiGr620HqZYwuvPyUvR953MgaV=w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 7 Mar 2017 16:04:42 -0800
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] sched.h split-up

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> But as mentioned - this is untested. It seems to build, and it looks
> "ObviouslyCorrect(tm)", but I didn't actually try to boot it.

Well, it boots, but it's not like there are all that many users of the
wait_event_interruptible*_locked*() interfaces, so it's dubious that I
actually exercised the changes all that much (if at all).

Of course, that's just more reason to *not* have it be some big macro
expansion in a header file that requires other includes. Basically,
this interface isn't worth the header inclusion pain.

And no, I didn't try to see how many

   #include <linux/sched/signal.h>

I could try to remove with this.

But I *did* verify that I could now build that fs/overlayfs/util.c
file with that #include removed.

That's the case that caused a semantic merge issue for me - but I
don't know how many others Ingo added as part of the split-up.

                   Linus