linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] wcslen() prototype in string.h

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: <Z-PAY6t3NYCbgXpa@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2025 10:52:51 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
Cc: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>,
	Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers+lkml@...il.com>,
	Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>,
	Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-efi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] wcslen() prototype in string.h

On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 02:45:16PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 07:05:28PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 09:58:47AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 06:17:34PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 08:45:19AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:

...

> > > > > Rename the efi function to avoid the conflict.
> > > > 
> > > > Hmm... Why not split this to two, rename patch as a standalone makes sense to
> > > > me even outside of this series.
> > > 
> > > How so? If nls.h is not included in printk.c via string.h, which does
> > > not happen without this series, what value does the rename have? I do
> > > not mind splitting it up that way to keep things cleaner, I am just
> > > wondering what would be the justification in the changelog (I guess just
> > > that nls.h may get included in the future for some reason)?
> > 
> > Inside this series the justification is obvious (a.k.a. the same), outside
> > yes something like "Put EFI specific function to the respective namespace
> > to avoid potential clash in the future when including another header."
> 
> Okay, sounds reasonable to me. This is what I ended up with for that
> change, which will become patch one of the series.

LGTM.
However, now I'm thinking about nls.h appearing in the string.h.
The former actually lacks two headers in it: module.h and types.h.
I'm wondering if fixing nls.h would be even possible after your series.


> with basically the same changelog.
> 
> I will send v2 either tomorrow afternoon or Thursday morning to give a
> little more time for initial review/comments.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko