linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCHES] termios.h cleanups

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: <CAHk-=wh91JqnMU+aN9NEy4vB9hePFEYLtiAVtS+U6VE-17pDBg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 20 Aug 2022 14:44:09 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCHES] termios.h cleanups

On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 11:44 AM Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
>         Umm...  Might as well, I guess...  Where to put those, though?
> drivers/tty/tty_ioctl.c is not an option, unfortunately - it'll pick
> the local definitions, __weak or no __weak.

IThat bug is ancient history, and tty_ioctl.c is just fine.

Yes, we used to have the "you can't have __weak function definitions
in the same file that uses them" rule.

But it was due to a bug in gcc-4.1, which would inline weak functions.

But we long since gave up on gcc-4.1, and we have __weak functions
declarations in the same file as the use in multiple places. See for
example arch_release_task_struct() in kernel/fork.c.

                 Linus