netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 2/2] net: sock: undefine SOCK

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]

Date:   Mon, 25 Feb 2019 14:00:09 -0800
From:   Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        shaoyafang@...iglobal.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 2/2] net: sock: undefine SOCK_DEBUGGING

On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 6:31 PM David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>
> From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
> Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2019 17:11:08 -0800
>
> > On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 1:21 PM David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> You are forcing everyone who wants to use this to add a curstom local
> >> source code change into their build.
> >
> > What's wrong with this? People carry custom changes in anyway,
> > do we really need to care about all the downstream changes?
>
> No way am I allowing this, sorry.
>
> Either it's something in the tree that people can use or it's
> a crap hack.
>
> When we see stuff like this in a driver we ask the driver author to
> remove it.

Just to clarify, I have been suggesting to completely remove
this unused macro, never suggest to just undefine it in-tree.

There is no reason to keep it in-tree, whether defined or undefined,
just for downstream users.

Thanks.