lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Aug]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [RFC v2 2/7] keys: initialize root uid and session keyrings early
    From
    Date
    On Thu, 2012-08-16 at 15:59 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
    > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
    > > On Thu, 2012-08-16 at 15:13 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
    > >> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
    > >> >> > +#include "internal.h"
    > >> >> > +static int __init init_root_keyring(void)
    > >> >> > +{
    > >> >> > + return install_user_keyrings();
    > >> >> > +}
    > >> >> > +
    > >> >> > +late_initcall(init_root_keyring);
    > >> >> > --
    > >> >>
    > >> >> Why is this in an entirely new file instead of just being added to
    > >> >> process_keys.c ?
    > >> >>
    > >> >> josh
    > >> >
    > >> > Only when "CONFIG_INTEGRITY_SIGNATURE" is selected, does this get built.
    > >>
    > >> Yes, I noticed that. It doesn't explain why it's in its own file. You
    > >> could accomplish the same thing by wrapping the function and initcall
    > >> in #ifdef CONFIG_INTEGRITY_SIGNATURE in process_keys.c.
    > >
    > > I was under the impression using 'ifdefs' in 'C' code was frowned upon
    > > (Documentation/SubmittingPatches section 2.2). This would be an
    > > exception?
    >
    > If it makes a big ugly mess it's frowned upon. But if you're adding 7
    > lines of code in a new file that will almost certainly never get more
    > code added to it, I'm not sure. IMHO, it can go into an existing file.
    > Others might disagree. Isn't Linux development fun?!

    This is just a case where if I had 'ifdef's in 'C' code, I'm sure
    someone would have complained. :)

    Mimi



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-08-16 22:41    [W:0.028 / U:32.048 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site