On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 11:38:59PM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote: > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 01:25:30PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 01:12:55PM +0200, Lukas Wunner wrote: > > > -.data 56 > > > +.data 0 > > > -.rodata 32 > > > +.rodata 88 > > > > > > Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Lukas Wunner <lukas@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Acked-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > It'd be nice if this had a changelog. I'm happy if this goes via the > > x86 tree. > > Thanks, I'll resend with your ack. > > As for the changelog, to be honest I can't think of much more to write > there. One important motivation of constifying structs that are never > modified, and particularly structs containing function pointers like > this one, is to prevent their modification and subsequent usage by an > attacker. However constification patches are submitted all the > time by Julia Lawall and others, and I've never seen this rationale > spelled out in a commit message, so the assumption seems to be that > it's common knowledge. I could probably add something like > > Size of pci-mid.o ELF sections: > > to clarify what the numbers in the changelog refer to. Part of this is an artifact of my workflow. I read and review patches in mutt, and then all I see is the body of the changelog, not the subject line. So in this case, all I see is: -.data 56 +.data 0 -.rodata 32 +.rodata 88 which isn't much. I mean, I can guess that you're reducing the size of things. But apparently even that isn't the reason you're doing this. Something as simple as "make mid_pci_platform_pm const because it never needs to be modified" might be enough. Bjorn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
