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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAE-cH4qJKrgN6W-JrdiVw8dR-Bso1P0R0koWtw8CmNCYDHDM6w@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2023 16:17:34 -0800 From: Tanzir Hasan <tanzirh@...gle.com> To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Nick Desaulniers <nnn@...gle.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/syscalls: shrink entry/syscall_32.i via IWYU On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 3:34 PM Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 10:38:41PM +0000, Tanzir Hasan wrote: > > This diff uses an open source tool include-what-you-use (IWYU) to modify > > the include list, changing indirect includes to direct includes. IWYU is > > implemented using the IWYUScripts github repository which is a tool that > > is currently undergoing development. These changes seek to improve build > > times. > > > > This change to entry/syscall_32.c resulted in a preprocessed size of > > entry/syscall_32.i from 64002 lines to 47986 lines (-25%) for the x86 > > defconfig. > > > > Signed-off-by: Tanzir Hasan <tanzirh@...gle.com> > > --- > > arch/x86/entry/syscall_32.c | 3 ++- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/syscall_32.c b/arch/x86/entry/syscall_32.c > > index 8cfc9bc73e7f..66db11fe8a1c 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/entry/syscall_32.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/entry/syscall_32.c > > @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ > > #include <linux/linkage.h> > > #include <linux/sys.h> > > #include <linux/cache.h> > > -#include <linux/syscalls.h> > > +#include <linux/ptrace.h> > > #include <asm/syscall.h> > > Really? What do we need linux/ptrace.h for? Because if it's > struct pt_regs for the generated externs, we might as well have > just said > struct pt_regs; > and that would be it. > > <digs around a bit> > > As the matter of fact, all you need out of those includes is this: > > struct pt_regs; > typedef long (*sys_call_ptr_t)(const struct pt_regs *); > extern const sys_call_ptr_t sys_call_table[]; > #if defined(CONFIG_X86_32) > #define ia32_sys_call_table sys_call_table > #else > /* > * These may not exist, but still put the prototypes in so we > * can use IS_ENABLED(). > */ > extern const sys_call_ptr_t ia32_sys_call_table[]; > extern const sys_call_ptr_t x32_sys_call_table[]; > #endif I see that only pt_regs is necessary and I understand this approach. I was wondering if using this approach would reduce readability. Once we add the snippet, the file builds even after removing the following lines: #include <linux/linkage.h> #include <linux/sys.h> #include <linux/cache.h> #include <linux/ptrace.h> #include <asm/syscall.h> It is possible to remove them all, but do you think any should be kept? Best, Tanzir
Powered by blists - more mailing lists