linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] kernel.h: move VERIFY_OCTAL

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: <aS3z-4Gq3rCmFIdD@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2025 22:00:59 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
	Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
	Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
	Tvrtko Ursulin <tursulin@...ulin.net>,
	Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>,
	Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...nel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] kernel.h: move VERIFY_OCTAL_PERMISSIONS() to sysfs.h

On Mon, Dec 01, 2025 at 11:51:24AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 11/30/25 11:38 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 30, 2025 at 12:42:35PM -0500, Yury Norov wrote:
> 
> >> This series was tested by 0-day and LKP. 0-day runs allyesconfig,
> > 
> > AFAICS in the below no configuration had been tested against allYESconfig.
> > All of them are allNOconfig.
> > 
> >> as far as I know. It only sends email in case of errors. LKP is OK, find the
> >> report below.
> > 
> >> All but XFS include it via linux/module.h -> linux/moduleparam.h path.
> >> XFS has a linkage layer: xfs.h -> xfs_linux.h-> linux/module.h, so
> >> it's pretty much the same.
> >>
> >> I think, module.h inclusion path is OK for this macro and definitely
> >> better than kernel.h. Notice, none of them, except for vgpu_dbg,
> >> include kernel.h directly.
> > 
> > Ideally those (especially and in the first place headers) should follow IWYU
> > principle and avoid indirect (non-guaranteed) inclusions.
> 
> Can you (or anyone) get IWYU (software) to work?
> I tried it a few months ago but didn't have the correct magic
> incantation for it.
> (no specifics at the moment)

You should talk to Jonathan Cameron (Cc'ed), he was able to run it to some
extent. AFAIR the state of affairs is that it gives a lot of low-level headers
that we should not really go too deep to (at least for now). That means the
carefully crafted map of guarantees needs to be provided (e.g., if we include
bitmap.h, bitops.h and/or bits.h are guaranteed, so no need to be included).

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko