Re: [PATCH v2 01/29] powerpc: Rename "notes" PT_NOTE to "note"
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/29] powerpc: Rename "notes" PT_NOTE to "note"
- From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 11:25:52 -0500
- Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-s390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Michal Simek <monstr@xxxxxxxxx>, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-ia64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>, linux-xtensa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx>, linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Yoshinori Sato <ysato@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-parisc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-alpha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@xxxxxxxxx>, Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-c6x-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <201910110910.48270FC97@keescook>
- References: <20191011000609.29728-1-keescook@chromium.org> <20191011000609.29728-2-keescook@chromium.org> <20191011082519.GI9749@gate.crashing.org> <201910110910.48270FC97@keescook>
- User-agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 09:11:43AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 03:25:19AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 05:05:41PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > The Program Header identifiers are internal to the linker scripts. In
> > > preparation for moving the NOTES segment declaration into RO_DATA,
> > > standardize the identifier for the PT_NOTE entry to "note" as used by
> > > all other architectures that emit PT_NOTE.
> >
> > All other archs are wrong, and "notes" is a much better name. This
> > segment does not contain a single "note", but multiple "notes".
>
> True, but the naming appears to be based off the Program Header name of
> "PT_NOTE".
Ah, so that's why the kernel segment (which isn't text btw, it's rwx) is
called "load" :-P
(Not convinced. Some arch just got it wrong, and many others blindly
copied it? That sounds a lot more likely imo.)
> Regardless, it is an entirely internal-to-the-linker-script
> identifier, so I am just consolidating on a common name with the least
> number of collateral changes.
Yes, that's what I'm complaining about.
Names *matter*, internal names doubly so. So why replace a good name with
a worse name? Because it is slightly less work for you?
Segher
p.s. Thanks for doing this, removing the powerpc workaround etc. :-)
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Kernel]
[Sparc Linux]
[DCCP]
[Linux ARM]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux x86_64]
[Linux for Ham Radio]