netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 -next 00/15] sysctl: move sysctls from vm

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: <wk7dqsx42rxjt76dowrydumhinwwdltw7e5ptp7fh4rc4c4sji@jrtopui4fpwb>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 10:59:58 +0200
From: Joel Granados <j.granados@...sung.com>
To: yukaixiong <yukaixiong@...wei.com>
CC: <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <mcgrof@...nel.org>, <ysato@...rs.osdn.me>,
	<dalias@...c.org>, <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>, <luto@...nel.org>,
	<tglx@...utronix.de>, <mingo@...hat.com>, <bp@...en8.de>,
	<dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, <hpa@...or.com>, <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	<brauner@...nel.org>, <jack@...e.cz>, <kees@...nel.org>,
	<willy@...radead.org>, <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, <vbabka@...e.cz>,
	<lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>, <trondmy@...nel.org>, <anna@...nel.org>,
	<chuck.lever@...cle.com>, <jlayton@...nel.org>, <neilb@...e.de>,
	<okorniev@...hat.com>, <Dai.Ngo@...cle.com>, <tom@...pey.com>,
	<davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>,
	<pabeni@...hat.com>, <paul@...l-moore.com>, <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	<linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	<linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>, <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	<haifeng.xu@...pee.com>, <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
	<shikemeng@...weicloud.com>, <dchinner@...hat.com>, <bfoster@...hat.com>,
	<souravpanda@...gle.com>, <hannes@...xchg.org>, <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	<pasha.tatashin@...een.com>, <david@...hat.com>, <ryan.roberts@....com>,
	<ying.huang@...el.com>, <yang@...amperecomputing.com>,
	<zev@...ilderbeest.net>, <serge@...lyn.com>, <vegard.nossum@...cle.com>,
	<wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>, <sunnanyong@...wei.com>,
	<joel.granados@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 -next 00/15] sysctl: move sysctls from vm_table into
 its own files

On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 04:07:10PM +0800, yukaixiong wrote:
...
> 
> 
> >>   mm/swap.c                          |  16 ++-
> >>   mm/swap.h                          |   1 +
> >>   mm/util.c                          |  67 +++++++--
> >>   mm/vmscan.c                        |  23 +++
> >>   mm/vmstat.c                        |  44 +++++-
> >>   net/sunrpc/auth.c                  |   2 +-
> >>   security/min_addr.c                |  11 ++
> >>   23 files changed, 330 insertions(+), 312 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> 2.34.1
> >>
> > General comment for the patchset in general. I would consider making the
> > new sysctl tables const. There is an effort for doing this and it has
> > already lanted in linux-next. So if you base your patch from a recent
> > next release, then it should just work. If you *do* decide to add a
> > const qualifier, then note that you will create a dependency with the
> > sysctl patchset currently in next and that will have to go in before.
> >
> > Best
> >
> 
> Sorry,  I don't understand what is the meaning of "create a dependency 
> with the sysctl patchset".
The patches in the sysctl subsys that allow you to qualify the ctl_table
as const are not in mainline yet. They are in linux-next. This means
that if these patches go into the next kernel release before the
sysctl-next branch, it will have compilation errors. Therefore the
sysctl-next branch needs to be pulled in to the new kernel release
before this patchest. This also means that for this to build properly it
has to be based on a linux-next release.

> 
> Do you just want me to change all "static struct ctl_table" type table 
> into "static const struct ctl_table" type in my patchset?
You should const qualify them if the maintainer that is pulling in these
patches is ok with it. You should *not* const qualify them if the
maintainer prefers otherwise.

Please get back to me if I did not address your questions.

Best

-- 

Joel Granados