On Sat, 29 Jul 2017, Florian Westphal wrote: > Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, 29 Jul 2017, Florian Westphal wrote: > > > > > Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > The nf_hook_ops structure is only passed as the second argument to > > > > nf_register_net_hook or nf_unregister_net_hook, both of which are > > > > declared as const. Thus the nf_hook_ops structure itself can be > > > > const. > > > > > > Right, also see > > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/793767/ > > > > > > This series misses most of them (all arrays perhaps)? > > > > Yes, my rule doesn't look for arrays. I guess they are all done already > > anyway? > > I think so (the patch is not yet applied though). OK, just drop my patch then. > > From a quick glance I don't see why we can't e.g. constify > nf_conntrack_l3/4_proto too. It is not going to be as simple > as just placing const everywhere, but I see no requirement for > having these writeable. I will take a look. thanks, julia > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
