linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/45] C++: Convert the kernel to 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <49231a98-d39f-4920-8d9f-e60aa014f518@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 18:54:41 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        pinskia@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/45] C++: Convert the kernel to C++

One thing I forgot to mention that would be quite useful is careful use 
of namespaces. For example, putting init functions in their own 
namespace would have not only make it a lot harder to call init 
functions from non-init functions by mistake (calling init::func() 
explicitly is a highly visible "I really do mean to do this."

However, it also let us do separate init versions of functions like 
cpu_feature_enable() that contain optimizations that aren't actually 
usable at init time (alternatives have not been applied.) The idea is 
*not* to change the code, but rather the compiler will simply prefer 
init:: functions from inside other init:: functions (a direct 
consequence of how namespaces work.)

	-hpa