linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/10] x86/mm/numa: Remove uninitialized

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]

Date:   Thu, 04 Jun 2020 23:39:05 +0200
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        b43-dev@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] x86/mm/numa: Remove uninitialized_var() usage

Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> writes:
>> > -#define NODE_NOT_IN_PAGE_FLAGS
>> > +#define NODE_NOT_IN_PAGE_FLAGS 1
>> 
>> but if we ever lose the 1 then the above will silently compile the code
>> within the IS_ENABLED() section out.
>
> That's true, yes. I considered two other ways to do this:
>
> 1) smallest patch, but more #ifdef:
> 2) medium size, weird style:
>
> and 3 is what I sent: biggest, but removes #ifdef
>
> Any preference?

>From a readbility POV I surely prefer #3. i"m just wary. Add a big fat
comment to the define might mitigate that, hmm?

Thanks,

        tglx