linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 06/12] mm, s390: constify mapping related test functions for improved const-correctness

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

Message-ID: <0bcb2d4d-9fb5-40c0-ab61-e021277a6ba3@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2025 17:11:00 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@...os.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, axelrasmussen@...gle.com, yuanchu@...gle.com,
 willy@...radead.org, hughd@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, vbabka@...e.cz,
 rppt@...nel.org, surenb@...gle.com, vishal.moola@...il.com,
 linux@...linux.org.uk, James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com, deller@....de,
 agordeev@...ux.ibm.com, gerald.schaefer@...ux.ibm.com, hca@...ux.ibm.com,
 gor@...ux.ibm.com, borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com, svens@...ux.ibm.com,
 davem@...emloft.net, andreas@...sler.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
 luto@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
 bp@...en8.de, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, chris@...kel.net,
 jcmvbkbc@...il.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org,
 jack@...e.cz, weixugc@...gle.com, baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com,
 rientjes@...gle.com, shakeel.butt@...ux.dev, thuth@...hat.com,
 broonie@...nel.org, osalvador@...e.de, jfalempe@...hat.com,
 mpe@...erman.id.au, nysal@...ux.ibm.com,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 06/12] mm, s390: constify mapping related test
 functions for improved const-correctness

On 01.09.25 17:02, Max Kellermann wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 3:54 PM David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>>> -int vma_is_stack_for_current(struct vm_area_struct *vma);
>>> +int vma_is_stack_for_current(const struct vm_area_struct *vma);
>>
>> Should this also be *const ?
> 
> No. These are function protoypes. A "const" on a parameter value
> (pointer address, not pointed-to memory) makes no sense on a
> prototype.

But couldn't you argue the same about variable names? In most (not all 
:) ) we keep declaration + definition in sync. So thus my confusion.

-- 
Cheers

David / dhildenb