Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190307114511.870090179@infradead.org> <20190307120317.GD32477@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20190307125526.GB32534@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20190307131312.GC32534@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20190307164705.qbu4ytdfdmsighas@treble> <2F80FC70-5D2F-425F-BEB5-D70E981CC684@zytor.com>
 <20190307171829.xww7is5qja32r7ux@treble> <714E9D57-CCAE-4A69-AC3E-E6AFC525834E@zytor.com>
 <20190307174556.m7nh2y4wt3lbhuxd@treble>
In-Reply-To: <20190307174556.m7nh2y4wt3lbhuxd@treble>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Thu, 7 Mar 2019 09:48:13 -0800
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgE40LzP7KNdEqjEeUQJN3r5Qa-sSymZRMO7CgnMdM57A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/20] objtool: UACCESS validation v3
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Cc:     Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>, valentin.schneider@arm.com,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 9:46 AM Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Is that possible to do in a C macro?  Doesn't seem to work for me...

The meat of that macro could easily be done as a helper inline function.

But as mentioned, I think a better option would be to remove it
entirely, if at all possible.

The best part about that config option is the comment, and while cute
I don't think that's really worth saving it for...

               Linus