linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] io_uring/waitid: remove #ifdef CONFIG

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: <91c200cd-2b2d-4756-b641-aa1bd4ec9796@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 19:10:20 +0000
From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
 Caleb Sander Mateos <csander@...estorage.com>
Cc: io-uring@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] io_uring/waitid: remove #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT

On 2/24/25 17:55, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 2/24/25 10:53 AM, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 9:44 AM Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2/24/25 10:23 AM, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote:
>>>> io_is_compat() is already defined to return false if CONFIG_COMPAT is
>>>> disabled. So remove the additional #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT guards. Let the
>>>> compiler optimize out the dead code when CONFIG_COMPAT is disabled.
>>>
>>> Would you mind if I fold this into Pavel's patch? I can keep it
>>> standalone too, just let me know.
>>
>> Fine by me, though I thought Pavel was suggesting keeping it separate:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/da109d01-7aab-4205-bbb1-f5f1387f1847@gmail.com/T/#u
> 
> I'm reading it as he has other stuff that will go on top. I don't see
> any reason to double stage this part, might as well remove the
> CONFIG dependency at the same time, if it's doable.
> 
> Pavel?

I'm not sure why you'd want that, but I don't mind

-- 
Pavel Begunkov