linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] smp: kernel/panic.c

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: <20210317200922.GC3830960@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 Mar 2021 21:09:22 +0100
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        He Ying <heying24@...wei.com>, frederic@...nel.org,
        paulmck@...nel.org, clg@...d.org, qais.yousef@....com,
        johnny.chenyi@...wei.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] smp: kernel/panic.c - silence warnings


* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:

> Now, the C people figured that distinction was useless and allowed 
> sloppiness. But I still think there's merrit to that. And as 
> mentioned earlier, it is consistent with variable declarations.

Fully agreed, and my other point was that it's also consistent with 
the other existing externs were used *in the same header file* 
already.

I.e. there's nothing more sloppy than mixing different styles within 
the same header. Checkpatch needs to be fixed or ignored here.

Thanks,

	Ingo