linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] locks: remove trailing semicolon in macro definition

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]

Message-ID: <9dfe4206580f2c0d59ca0a9e510054ce378cb2d8.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Sun, 29 Nov 2020 14:31:51 -0800
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     jlayton@...nel.org, bfields@...ldses.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locks: remove trailing semicolon in macro definition

On Sun, 2020-11-29 at 10:15 -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> I think nowadays we should always use static inlines for argument
> checking unless we're capturing debug information like __FILE__ or
> __LINE__ or something that a static inline can't.

IMO: __LINE__ should never be used.

__func__ is the only thing that can't be captured correctly as
the inline gets its own name.

__builtin_return_address(1) would generally work well enough
for the inlines.

> There was a time when we had problems with compiler expansion of static
> inlines, so we shouldn't go back and churn the code base to change it
> because there's thousands of these and possibly some old compiler used
> for an obscure architecture that still needs the define.

That's not a very compelling argument to me.

Those old compilers and obscure architectures should continue
to use the old versions of the code.