> So for statics, I think `static const char *` wins due to allowing
> merging (although it doesn't matter here). For non-statics, you end up
> with extra pointer constants. Those could get removed, but Linux
> doesn't
> have -fvisibility=hidden and I'm not sure how clever linkers are.
> Maybe
>
> So for statics, I think `static const char *` wins due to allowing
> merging (although it doesn't matter here). For non-statics, you end up
> with extra pointer constants. Those could get removed, but Linux
> doesn't
> have -fvisibility=hidden and I'm not sure how clever linkers are.
> Maybe
>
> Thanks for the explanation. I don't think we need to worry about
> merging these strings, but I'll keep it in mind.
>
> However, the "folklore" of the kernel was to never do:
> char *foo = "bar";
> but instead do:
> char foo[] = "bar";
> to save on the extra variable that the
> Thanks for the explanation. I don't think we need to worry about
> merging these strings, but I'll keep it in mind.
>
> However, the "folklore" of the kernel was to never do:
> char *foo = "bar";
> but instead do:
> char foo[] = "bar";
> to save on the extra variable that the
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 03:51:01PM -0500, Daniel Micay wrote:
> > To follow up on this, and after staring at too many outputs of the
> > compiler, I think what this really should be is:
> > static char const critical_overtemp_path[] =
> > "/sbin/critical_overtemp";
> > right?
> >
> > That way
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 03:51:01PM -0500, Daniel Micay wrote:
> > To follow up on this, and after staring at too many outputs of the
> > compiler, I think what this really should be is:
> > static char const critical_overtemp_path[] =
> > "/sbin/critical_overtemp";
> > right?
> >
> > That way
> To follow up on this, and after staring at too many outputs of the
> compiler, I think what this really should be is:
> static char const critical_overtemp_path[] =
> "/sbin/critical_overtemp";
> right?
>
> That way both the variable, and the data, end up in read-only memory
> from what I
> To follow up on this, and after staring at too many outputs of the
> compiler, I think what this really should be is:
> static char const critical_overtemp_path[] =
> "/sbin/critical_overtemp";
> right?
>
> That way both the variable, and the data, end up in read-only memory
> from what I
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 12:54:44PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 03:29:52PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:50:52AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > >
> > > There are a number of usermode helper binaries that are "hard coded" in
> > > the kernel today, so mark
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 12:54:44PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 03:29:52PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:50:52AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > >
> > > There are a number of usermode helper binaries that are "hard coded" in
> > > the kernel today, so mark
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 03:29:52PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:50:52AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> > There are a number of usermode helper binaries that are "hard coded" in
> > the kernel today, so mark them as "const" to make it harder for someone
> > to change where
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 03:29:52PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:50:52AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> > There are a number of usermode helper binaries that are "hard coded" in
> > the kernel today, so mark them as "const" to make it harder for someone
> > to change where
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:50:52AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
>
> There are a number of usermode helper binaries that are "hard coded" in
> the kernel today, so mark them as "const" to make it harder for someone
> to change where the variables point to.
You're not preventing change of where they
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:50:52AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
>
> There are a number of usermode helper binaries that are "hard coded" in
> the kernel today, so mark them as "const" to make it harder for someone
> to change where the variables point to.
You're not preventing change of where they
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:50:52AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
>
> There are a number of usermode helper binaries that are "hard coded" in
> the kernel today, so mark them as "const" to make it harder for someone
> to change where the variables point to.
>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:50:52AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
>
> There are a number of usermode helper binaries that are "hard coded" in
> the kernel today, so mark them as "const" to make it harder for someone
> to change where the variables point to.
>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman
> ---
>
16 matches
Mail list logo
