linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/20] Add memberof(), split headers, and simplify code

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: <YZt8PdBH5JcWTurH@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Nov 2021 13:17:17 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Alejandro Colomar <alx.manpages@...il.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
        Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/20] Add memberof(), split headers, and simplify code

On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 02:00:43PM +0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I splitted some macros into separate headers,
> to be able to use them
> without pulling too many deps.
> 
> I also simplified some of themr
> to be implemented in terms of the others
> and to remove some unnecessary explicit casts.
> 
> And I added memberof(),
> which gives name to a typical construction
> to get the member of a struct
> without needing a variable of that type.
> 
> 
> The next step after this patch set
> is another one removing all redefinitions
> (at least all that are possible,
> since these headers can't be included everywhere)
> of these macros,
> by including these new tiny headers.
> Since these headers are so tiny and bring no dependencies,
> they should break anything.
> 
> It was hard for me to get this working
> because the order of includes _matters a lot_,
> and which headers you include _matters_ even outside of uapi.
> So I think this should help fix that,
> by allowing headers to pull exactly what they want,
> without all of the stuff that came with
> <linux/compiler.h>
> <linux/compiler_types.h>
> <linux/stddef.h>.
> 
> I already have much of the next patch set ready,
> and it removes hundreds of redefinitions of these macros,
> which should be a good thing.
> 
> 
> Then,
> when there are (almost) no redefinitions of these macros,
> I'll prepare a 3rd patch set that
> explicitly includes these tiny headers
> wherever these macros were already in use,
> to allow for removal of other bigger headers
> (although I won't remove anything,
> to avoid silently breaking anything).
> 
> 
> And then,
> a 4th patch set will
> attempt to find all uses of these macros
> that were not even named
> (i.e., hard-coded sizeof divisions).
> 
> 
> Hope this is clear and
> that you like these changes.

What happens to the indentation in your emails?!
It looks like a bad poem :-)

On top of that, never start a new thread inside the previous one.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko