linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: clean up for 'const static' in bpf

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: <CAADnVQL5NBY2E2iGCYZAeGN5gtcK0uyM1UpDNaZ28Ukrrb8tGA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Feb 2021 17:46:55 -0800
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:     Xu Jia <xujia39@...wei.com>
Cc:     bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        Florent Revest <revest@...omium.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: clean up for 'const static' in bpf_lsm.c

On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 5:40 PM Xu Jia <xujia39@...wei.com> wrote:
>
> Prefer 'static const' over 'const static' here
>
> Signed-off-by: Xu Jia <xujia39@...wei.com>
> ---
>  kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
> index 1622a44d1617..75b1c678d558 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
> @@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ BPF_CALL_2(bpf_bprm_opts_set, struct linux_binprm *, bprm, u64, flags)
>
>  BTF_ID_LIST_SINGLE(bpf_bprm_opts_set_btf_ids, struct, linux_binprm)
>
> -const static struct bpf_func_proto bpf_bprm_opts_set_proto = {
> +static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_bprm_opts_set_proto = {

I totally agree that it's more canonical this way, but I don't think
such git history noise
is worth it.