linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][next] optee: make read-only array attr static const

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: <aWUQBSa3dw5HOsVd@stanley.mountain>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2026 18:15:17 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
To: Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...nel.org>
Cc: Colin Ian King <coking@...dia.com>,
	Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>,
	op-tee@...ts.trustedfirmware.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] optee: make read-only array attr static const

On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 04:56:10PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 09, 2026 at 03:44:42PM +0000, Colin Ian King wrote:
> > Don't populate the read-only array attr on the stack at run
> > time, instead make it static const.
> 
> Is there any value add to do this? AFAIK, the static local variables
> aren't preffered.
> 

I have never heard that static local variables aren't prefered.  I
imagine that because they're often not thread safe?  But if they're
const thread safeness isn't an problem.  Generally, we prefer the
scope as local as possible.

regards,
dan carpenter