linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: add `const` to lots of pointer parameters

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: <832e89d4-fc7c-47ad-b375-6af0ce796d42@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2025 15:00:39 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@...os.com>
Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
 Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, vbabka@...e.cz, rppt@...nel.org, surenb@...gle.com,
 mhocko@...e.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: add `const` to lots of pointer parameters

On 28.08.25 14:40, Max Kellermann wrote:
>> On 28.08.25 14:24, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 09:22:33PM +0200, Max Kellermann wrote:
>>>> For improved const-correctness.
>>>
>>> 'const-correctness' in C is extremely weak.
> 
> "const correctness" is a commonly used term for this concept, and I
> find your arguments against const-correctness "extremely weak". I
> don't think discussing the benefits of const-correctness is worth the
> time; the concept is trivial enough, and if you don't already agree,
> there is no way I can convince you. Let's agree to disagree.
> 
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2025 at 2:29 PM David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>> I recall that Willy did some more targeted conversions of that kind in the past regarding folios.
> 
> And I found many more commits adding "const" to pointer parameters.
> That shows this kind of patch is acceptable in the Linux kernel.
> 
>> I would appreciate similarly doing it in logical chunks.
> 
> So you suggest splitting the patch into many?

Yes, for example focusing on a specific class of functions like Willy did.

That makes my life as a maintainer and reviewer easier, and allows for 
holding back some of these patches if we expect conflicts in that area soon.

/me stares helplessly at his overflowing inbox where #submitters is 
significantly larger than #reviewers, and the majority of patches are 
not in a form that would allow for any kinds of easy review.

-- 
Cheers

David / dhildenb