linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 00/26] Introduce common headers for vDSO

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: <87fteadjga.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:   Sun, 15 Mar 2020 11:02:45 +0100
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@...il.com>,
        Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
        clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com, x86@...nel.org
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Paul Burton <paul.burton@...s.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@...roid.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Peter Collingbourne <pcc@...gle.com>,
        Andrei Vagin <avagin@...nvz.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/26] Introduce common headers for vDSO

Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@...il.com> writes:
> I like the idea, but I'm wondering if we could have less-grained
> headers? Like, AFAICS the patches create headers < 10 lines and even
> mostly < 5 lines.. I like that header's names perfectly describe what's
> inside, but I'm not sure how effective to have a lot of extra-small
> includes.

If that goes all into a big header then the headers from where the bits and
pieces are split out would have all to include this big header which
might result in other include dependency nightmares.

>>  create mode 100644 include/vdso/time.h
>>  create mode 100644 include/vdso/time32.h
>>  create mode 100644 include/vdso/time64.h
>
> Maybe we could made them less-grained?
>
> I.e, time32 + time64 + time.h => time.h?

Then you end up with ifdeffery. I like the clear separation.

Thanks,

        tglx