Re: [PATCH v3 00/11] sysctl: treewide: constify ctl_table argument of sysctl handlers

Joel Granados <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.lvs-devel,dev.linux.lists.bridge,org.infradead.lists.kexec,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.infradead.lists.linux-riscv,org.kernel.vger.bpf,org.kernel.vger.linux-fsdevel,org.kernel.vger.linux-hardening,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-nfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-perf-users,org.kernel.vger.linux-rdma,org.kernel.vger.linux-s390,org.kernel.vger.linux-sctp,org.kernel.vger.linux-security-module,org.kernel.vger.linux-trace-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-xfs,org.kernel.vger.netdev,org.kernel.vger.netfilter-devel,org.kvack.linux-mm,org.ozlabs.lists.linuxppc-dev
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Sat, May 11, 2024 at 11:51:18AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> Hi Kees,
> 
> On 2024-05-08 10:11:35+0000, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 08:12:34PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 09:54:35 +0200 Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > > > The series was split from my larger series sysctl-const series [0].
> > > > It only focusses on the proc_handlers but is an important step to be
> > > > able to move all static definitions of ctl_table into .rodata.
> > > 
> > > Split this per subsystem, please.
> > 
> > I've done a few painful API transitions before, and I don't think the
> > complexity of these changes needs a per-subsystem constification pass. I
> > think this series is the right approach, but that patch 11 will need
> > coordination with Linus. We regularly do system-wide prototype changes
> > like this right at the end of the merge window before -rc1 comes out.
> 
> That sounds good.
> 
> > The requirements are pretty simple: it needs to be a obvious changes
> > (this certainly is) and as close to 100% mechanical as possible. I think
> > patch 11 easily qualifies. Linus should be able to run the same Coccinelle
> > script and get nearly the same results, etc. And all the other changes
> > need to have landed. This change also has no "silent failure" conditions:
> > anything mismatched will immediately stand out.
> 
> Unfortunately coccinelle alone is not sufficient, as some helpers with
> different prototypes are called by handlers and themselves are calling
> handler and therefore need to change in the same commit.
> But if I add a diff for those on top of the coccinelle script to the
> changelog it should be obvious.
Judging by Kees' comment on "100% mechanical", it might be better just
having the diff and have Linus apply than rather than two step process?
Have not these types of PRs, so am interested in what folks think.

> 
> > So, have patches 1-10 go via their respective subsystems, and once all
> > of those are in Linus's tree, send patch 11 as a stand-alone PR.
> 
> Ack, I'll do that with the cover letter information requested by Joel.
> 
> > (From patch 11, it looks like the seccomp read/write function changes
> > could be split out? I'll do that now...)
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Thomas

-- 

Joel Granados
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 659 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=w318
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.