linux-kernel - Re: kernel-trace: Fine-tuning for seven function implementations

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]

Date:   Tue, 23 May 2017 01:18:06 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kernel-trace: Fine-tuning for seven function implementations

On Mon, 22 May 2017 09:45:27 +0200
SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net> wrote:

> > I wont be touching or even looking at these until after 4.12-rc1 is
> > released. Feel free to reply to this email with a ping in a week or
> > two.  
> 
> *ping*
> 
> How do you think about to give these update suggestions another look?
>

The conversions of the seq_printf()s and friends are fine, but the rest
are not worth the churn. Yes checkpatch may complain about the NULL
compares and the kallocs(), but that's for new code, not for code that
has already been accepted.

-- Steve