netdev - Re: [PATCH 0/3] using guard/_

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]

Message-ID: <20240326171549.038591c8@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 17:15:49 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] using guard/__free in networking

On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 16:33:58 +0100 Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > I think you can't get scoped_guard() without guard(), so does that mean
> > > you'd accept the first patch in the series?  
> > 
> > How can we get one without the other.. do you reckon Joe P would let us
> > add a checkpatch check to warn people against pure guard() under net/ ?  
> 
> Maybe? But I think I do want to use guard() ;-)

IIUC Willem and Stan like the construct too, so I'm fine with patches 
1 and 2. But let's not convert the exiting code just yet (leave out 3)?