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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 16 May 2020 11:05:53 +0800 From: Xiaoming Ni <nixiaoming@...wei.com> To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> CC: <mcgrof@...nel.org>, <yzaikin@...gle.com>, <adobriyan@...il.com>, <mingo@...nel.org>, <peterz@...radead.org>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>, <bauerman@...ux.ibm.com>, <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>, <dvyukov@...gle.com>, <svens@...ckframe.org>, <joel@...lfernandes.org>, <tglx@...utronix.de>, <Jisheng.Zhang@...aptics.com>, <pmladek@...e.com>, <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, <wangle6@...wei.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] proc/sysctl: add shared variables -1 On 2020/5/16 10:47, Kees Cook wrote: > On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 10:32:19AM +0800, Xiaoming Ni wrote: >> On 2020/5/16 0:05, Kees Cook wrote: >>> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 05:06:28PM +0800, Xiaoming Ni wrote: >>>> On 2020/5/15 16:06, Kees Cook wrote: >>>>> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:33:42PM +0800, Xiaoming Ni wrote: >>>>>> Add the shared variable SYSCTL_NEG_ONE to replace the variable neg_one >>>>>> used in both sysctl_writes_strict and hung_task_warnings. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Xiaoming Ni <nixiaoming@...wei.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c | 2 +- >>>>>> include/linux/sysctl.h | 1 + >>>>>> kernel/hung_task_sysctl.c | 3 +-- >>>>>> kernel/sysctl.c | 3 +-- >>>>> >>>>> How about doing this refactoring in advance of the extraction patch? >>>> Before advance of the extraction patch, neg_one is only used in one file, >>>> does it seem to have no value for refactoring? >>> >>> I guess it doesn't matter much, but I think it's easier to review in the >>> sense that neg_one is first extracted and then later everything else is >>> moved. >>> >> Later, when more features sysctl interface is moved to the code file, there >> will be more variables that need to be extracted. >> So should I only extract the neg_one variable here, or should I extract all >> the variables used by multiple features? > > Hmm -- if you're going to do a consolidation pass, then nevermind, I > don't think order will matter then. > > Thank you for the cleanup! Sorry we're giving you back-and-forth advice! > > -Kees > Sorry, I don't fully understand. Does this mean that there is no need to adjust the patch order or the order of variables in sysctl_vals? Should I extract only SYSCTL_NEG_ONE or should I extract all variables? Thanks Xiaoming Ni
Powered by blists - more mailing lists