From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>,
x86@kernel.org, drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, b43-dev@lists.infradead.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] x86/mm/numa: Remove uninitialized_var() usage
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2020 23:39:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zh9i7bpi.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202006040728.8797FAA4@keescook>
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> writes:
>> > -#define NODE_NOT_IN_PAGE_FLAGS
>> > +#define NODE_NOT_IN_PAGE_FLAGS 1
>>
>> but if we ever lose the 1 then the above will silently compile the code
>> within the IS_ENABLED() section out.
>
> That's true, yes. I considered two other ways to do this:
>
> 1) smallest patch, but more #ifdef:
> 2) medium size, weird style:
>
> and 3 is what I sent: biggest, but removes #ifdef
>
> Any preference?
From a readbility POV I surely prefer #3. i"m just wary. Add a big fat
comment to the define might mitigate that, hmm?
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-04 21:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-03 23:31 [PATCH 00/10] Remove uninitialized_var() macro Kees Cook
2020-06-03 23:31 ` [PATCH 01/10] x86/mm/numa: Remove uninitialized_var() usage Kees Cook
2020-06-04 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-06-04 11:41 ` Miguel Ojeda
2020-06-04 14:56 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-04 15:22 ` Miguel Ojeda
2020-06-04 14:34 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-04 21:39 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2020-06-04 22:39 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-03 23:31 ` [PATCH 02/10] drbd: " Kees Cook
2020-06-04 19:56 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-03 23:31 ` [PATCH 03/10] b43: " Kees Cook
2020-06-04 20:08 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-04 20:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-04 20:25 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-05 9:20 ` Kalle Valo
2020-06-03 23:31 ` [PATCH 04/10] rtlwifi: rtl8192cu: " Kees Cook
2020-06-04 20:16 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-05 9:18 ` Kalle Valo
2020-06-03 23:31 ` [PATCH 05/10] ide: " Kees Cook
2020-06-04 19:29 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-04 20:20 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-04 20:29 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-15 19:32 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-04 20:58 ` Sedat Dilek
2020-06-03 23:31 ` [PATCH 06/10] clk: st: " Kees Cook
2020-06-04 4:38 ` Stephen Boyd
2020-06-03 23:32 ` [PATCH 07/10] spi: davinci: " Kees Cook
2020-06-04 19:40 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-03 23:32 ` [PATCH 08/10] checkpatch: Remove awareness of uninitialized_var() macro Kees Cook
2020-06-04 0:02 ` Joe Perches
2020-06-04 1:40 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-04 1:47 ` Joe Perches
2020-06-04 2:44 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-04 2:53 ` Sedat Dilek
2020-06-04 3:46 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-03 23:32 ` [PATCH 09/10] treewide: Remove uninitialized_var() usage Kees Cook
2020-06-04 3:33 ` Nathan Chancellor
2020-06-04 4:02 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-04 10:45 ` Leon Romanovsky
2020-06-04 13:23 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-06-04 14:59 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-04 17:57 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-06-04 19:09 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-06-05 9:25 ` Kalle Valo
2020-06-03 23:32 ` [PATCH 10/10] compiler: Remove uninitialized_var() macro Kees Cook
2020-06-04 0:00 ` Bart Van Assche
2020-06-04 0:50 ` Miguel Ojeda
2020-06-04 1:23 ` [PATCH 00/10] " Sedat Dilek
2020-06-04 1:44 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-04 1:46 ` Sedat Dilek
2020-06-04 3:33 ` Nathan Chancellor
2020-06-04 7:26 ` Sedat Dilek
2020-06-04 14:27 ` Kees Cook
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87zh9i7bpi.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=apw@canonical.com \
--cc=b43-dev@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com \
--cc=drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-spi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).