Re: Current state of the sysctl constification effort

[Thomas Weißschuh]

On 2024-06-07 11:40:53+0000, Joel Granados wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 12:50:32PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > Hi Joel, Hi Luis,
> > 
> > most of the sysctl handler preparation patches have been picked up by
> > the subsystem maintainers and are available in -next.
> > 
> > Only two are missing:
> > 
> > * utsname: constify ctl_table arguments of utility function [0]
> > * sysctl: constify ctl_table arguments of utility function [1]
> > 
> > Both of them are going through the sysctl tree anyways.
> > 
> > With this done it should be possible to also queue up 
> > sysctl: treewide: constify the ctl_table argument of handlers [2]
> > for the bots to chew on in -next.
> > 
> > My local builds are still succeeding on the last submitted version of
> > the patch.
> > 
> > 
> > Thomas
> > 
> > [0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240518-sysctl-const-handler-utsname-v1-1-27a6c8813620@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240513-jag-constfy_sysctl_proc_args-v1-1-bba870a480d5@xxxxxxxxxxx/
> > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240423-sysctl-const-handler-v3-11-e0beccb836e2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> 
> All this is coming together nicely.

Indeed.

> Is there anything left to do besides
> what is being discussed in this mail, to start changing the ctl_tables
> to `static const`?

The changes to the tables also need (as per [0] and [1]):

* sysctl: move internal interfaces to const struct ctl_table
* sysctl: allow registration of const struct ctl_table

I think we do the handlers for v6.11, the rest of [0] and [1] for v6.12
and then we can go through the rest of the trees ctl_tables.


[0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231204-const-sysctl-v2-0-7a5060b11447@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
[1] https://git.sr.ht/~t-8ch/linux/log/sysctl-constfy