Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH v2] treewide: const qualify ctl_tables where applicable

[Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 6:22 AM Joel Granados <joel.granados@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 03:42:39PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 04:55:58PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > You could have static const within functions too. You get the rodata
> > > protection and function local scope, best of both worlds?
> >
> > timer_active is on the stack, so it can't be static const.
> >
> > Does this really need to be cc'd to such a wide distribution list?
> That is a very good question. I removed 160 people from the original
> e-mail and left the ones that where previously involved with this patch
> and left all the lists for good measure. But it seems I can reduce it
> even more.
>
> How about this: For these treewide efforts I just leave the people that
> are/were involved in the series and add two lists: linux-kernel and
> linux-hardening.
>
> Unless someone screams, I'll try this out on my next treewide.

I'm not screaming about it :) but anything that touches the LSM,
SELinux, or audit code (or matches the regex in MAINTAINERS) I would
prefer to see on the associated mailing list.

-- 
paul-moore.com