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  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]
Date:	Thu, 21 Aug 2014 20:53:19 +0800 (GMT+08:00)
From:	"Zhouyi Zhou" <>
To:	"Florian Westphal" <>
Cc:	"Zhouyi Zhou" <>,,,,,,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] netfilter/jump_label: use HAVE_JUMP_LABEL?

Thanks Florian for reviewing

> -----Original Messages-----
> From: "Florian Westphal" <>

> Zhouyi Zhou <> wrote:
> > 
> > CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL doesn't ensure HAVE_JUMP_LABEL, if it
> > is not the case use maintainers's own mutex to guard
> > the modification of global values.

CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL says the user wants to use jump labels.
But we also need the toolchain to support it.

That is reflected in CC_HAVE_ASM_GOTO=y, and if both are
set then HAVE_JUMP_LABEL is set to true.

> I don't understand this patch.
> What is the problem you are fixing?

There is basically no real problem here.
This patch only tries to make kernel code that using 
static_key infrastructure appears "unified"
> The intent is to only use static_key infrastructure
> if user has enabled CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL.

The other parts of kernel either use #ifdef HAVE_JUMP_LABEL,
or use no "#ifdef" at all(the two exceptions are netfilter 
and powerpc modules which I send patches to both).

Jason has suggested me to make the patches:

"Unified" is the reason, I guess :-)
so rookies like me can have unified examples to follow


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists