linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 00/12] mm: establish const-correctness for 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: <e42641a8-0f93-4441-9a96-7ed99f4d498d@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2025 13:15:01 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
 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, 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, conduct@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/12] mm: establish const-correctness for pointer
 parameters

On 01.09.25 13:05, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 01, 2025 at 12:54:40PM +0200, Max Kellermann wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 12:43 PM David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>>> Max, I think this series here is valuable, and you can see that from the
>>> engagement from reviewers (this is a *good* thing, I sometimes wish I
>>> would get feedback that would help me improve my submissions).
>>>
>>> So if you don't want to follow-up on this series to polish the patch
>>> descriptions etc,, let me now and I (or someone else around here) can
>>> drag it over the finishing line.
>>
>> Thanks David - I do want to finish this, if there is a constructive
>> path ahead. I know what you want, but I'm not so sure about the
>> others.
>>
>> I can swap all verbose patch messages with the one you suggested.
>> Would everybody agree that David's suggestion was enough text?
> 
> I'm fine with:
> 
> "constify shmem related test functions for improved const-correctness."
> 
> In the summary line, but, as I said on review, with a little more detail as
> to what you're doing in that specific file underneath.
> 
> You don't necessarily have to list every function, but just to give a sense of
> _why_ you chose those.
> 
> For instance:
> 
> 	mm: constify shmem related test functions for improved const-correctness
> 
> 	We select certain test functions which either invoke each other,
> 	functions that are already const-ified, or no further functions.
> 
> 	It is therefore relatively trivial to const-ify them, which
> 	provides a basis for further const-ification further up the call
> 	stack.

Yes, that covers the what/why/why okay. For me something shorter would 
be acceptable as well in this case (as explained, due to "test 
functions" semantics), but as long as we're not in the AI-slop range of 
text, all good with me.

-- 
Cheers

David / dhildenb