On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 03:12:58PM +0100, Richard Henderson wrote:
> During patch review for an addition of archrandom.h for arm64, it was
> suggeted that the arch_random_get_* functions should be marked __must_check.
> Which does sound like a good idea, since the by-reference integer output
> may be uninitialized when the boolean result is false.
>
> In addition, it turns out that arch_has_random() and arch_has_random_seed()
> are not used, and not easy to support for arm64. Rather than cobble
> something together that would not be testable, remove the interfaces
> against some future accidental use.
>
> In addition, I noticed a few other minor inconsistencies between the
> different architectures, e.g. powerpc isn't using bool.
>
> Change since v1:
> * Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed.
>
>
> r~
>
>
> Richard Henderson (10):
> x86: Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed
> powerpc: Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed
> s390: Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed
> linux/random.h: Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed
> linux/random.h: Use false with bool
> linux/random.h: Mark CONFIG_ARCH_RANDOM functions __must_check
> x86: Mark archrandom.h functions __must_check
> powerpc: Use bool in archrandom.h
> powerpc: Mark archrandom.h functions __must_check
> s390x: Mark archrandom.h functions __must_check
>
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/archrandom.h | 27 +++++++++-----------------
> arch/s390/include/asm/archrandom.h | 20 ++++---------------
> arch/x86/include/asm/archrandom.h | 28 ++++++++++++---------------
> include/linux/random.h | 24 ++++++++---------------
> 4 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)
>
> --
They look good to me.
Is anyone going to take them or should I though the tip tree?
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
