linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next] sctp: Remove commented out 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2c8985fa-4378-4aa2-a56d-c3ca04e8c74c@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 12:33:57 +0100
From: Mateusz Polchlopek <mateusz.polchlopek@...el.com>
To: Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@...ux.dev>
CC: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>, Xin Long
	<lucien.xin@...il.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet
	<edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni
	<pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
	<linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] sctp: Remove commented out code



On 2/11/2025 12:17 PM, Thorsten Blum wrote:
> On 11. Feb 2025, at 11:49, Mateusz Polchlopek wrote:
>> On 2/11/2025 11:20 AM, Thorsten Blum wrote:
>>> Remove commented out code.
>>> Signed-off-by: Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@...ux.dev>
>>> ---
>>>   include/linux/sctp.h | 1 -
>>>   1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/sctp.h b/include/linux/sctp.h
>>> index 836a7e200f39..812011d8b67e 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/sctp.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/sctp.h
>>> @@ -222,7 +222,6 @@ struct sctp_datahdr {
>>>    __be16 stream;
>>>    __be16 ssn;
>>>    __u32 ppid;
>>> - /* __u8  payload[]; */
>>>   };
>>>     struct sctp_data_chunk {
>>
>> Hi Thorsten
>>
>> I don't think we want to remove that piece of code, please refer
>> to the discussion under the link:
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/cover.1681917361.git.lucien.xin@gmail.com/
> 
> Hm, the commit message (dbda0fba7a14) says payload was deleted because
> "the member is not even used anywhere," but it was just commented out.
> In the cover letter it then explains that "deleted" actually means
> "commented out."
> 
> However, I can't follow the reasoning in the cover letter either:
> 
> "Note that instead of completely deleting it, we just leave it as a
> comment in the struct, signalling to the reader that we do expect
> such variable parameters over there, as Marcelo suggested."
> 
> Where do I find Marcelo's suggestion and the "variable parameters over
> there?"
> 

That's good question, I can't find the Marcelo suggestion that author
mention. It's hard to find without links to previous series or
discussion :/

I guess it should be also commented by maintainers, I see that in the
Xin's thread Kuba also commented change with commenting out instead
of removing code. Let's wait

> Thanks,
> Thorsten