linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 20/22] tools arch: Sync arch/x86/lib/memcpy

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: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F6127AEF9@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 25 Apr 2017 16:18:09 +0000
From:   "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
CC:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 20/22] tools arch: Sync arch/x86/lib/memcpy_64.S with
 the kernel

>> If we are going to have all these copies of kernel files below
>> "tools/...", perhaps checkpatch could warn people touching one
>> that the other needs the same update?
>
> How would checkpatch know tools hasn't already updated the other?

If checkpatch had a list of all the tools copies, it could warn if a patch
touched a file without touching the copy.

Not completely ideal because people might update the two files in
separate patches in a series (in which case they would see warnings
from both patches).

Also means that checkpatch needs the list of copied files ... not sure
how often that changes.

-Tony