Re: [PATCH] kernel/compat.c: mark expected switch fall-throughs

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Arnd,

On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 10:32:55 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>

Thanks

> It's a bit inconsistent though since put_compat_sigset() has the
> comments in separate lines, as of commit 89976005536c
> ("include/linux/compat.h: mark expected switch fall-throughs").

OK, I wasn't aware of that one.

> I don't care either way, but it might be better to do it the same way
> for both.

Indeed, I will redo it that way (with your Acked-by).

> We could also consider just getting rid of put_compat_sigset() and
> get_compat_sigset() but replacing them with a combined
> put_sigset()/get_sigset() that does the right thing for both native
> and compat tasks. This lets us kill a couple of compat system
> calls that only differ in their sigset_t argument. On little-endian
> systems (which are the vast majority of the installed base), there
> is no difference anyway there is no overhead anyway since
> native and compat sigset_t are identical.

That sounds like a bigger patch that would require some real testing :-)

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Attachment: pgp0ADGKlinBb.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature