linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] fs2dt: Refine kdump device

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 17 Jun 2014 14:03:36 +0800
From:	"Yang,Wei" <Wei.Yang@...driver.com>
To:	"Yang,Wei" <Wei.Yang@...driver.com>, <Wei.Yang@...driver.com>,
	<horms@...ge.net.au>
CC:	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] fs2dt: Refine kdump device_tree sort

Simon, I missed "kexec" string in subject, so please ignore this 
version. I would resend it with adding "kexec" in subject.

Thanks
Wei
On 06/17/2014 02:01 PM, Yang,Wei wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> How about this patch?
>
> Thanks
> Wei
> On 06/12/2014 01:16 PM, Wei.Yang@...driver.com wrote:
>> From: Yang Wei <Wei.Yang@...driver.com>
>>
>> The commit b02d735bf was to rearrange the device-tree entries, and
>> assumed that these entries are sorted in the ascending order. but
>> acctually when I was validating kexec and kdump, the order of
>> serial node still is changed. We should not only compare the length
>> of directory name, but also compare the directory name, it would
>> ensure that the order of device node is really in ascending order.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yang Wei <Wei.Yang@...driver.com>
>> ---
>>   kexec/fs2dt.c |   13 ++++++++++---
>>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>>         It is validated on Freescale t4240qds.
>>
>> diff --git a/kexec/fs2dt.c b/kexec/fs2dt.c
>> index 1e5f074..0bffaf5 100644
>> --- a/kexec/fs2dt.c
>> +++ b/kexec/fs2dt.c
>> @@ -479,6 +479,9 @@ static int comparefunc(const struct dirent 
>> **dentry1,
>>   {
>>       char *str1 = (*(struct dirent **)dentry1)->d_name;
>>       char *str2 = (*(struct dirent **)dentry2)->d_name;
>> +    char* ptr1 = strchr(str1, '@');
>> +    char* ptr2 = strchr(str2, '@');
>> +    int len1, len2;
>>         /*
>>        * strcmp scans from left to right and fails to idetify for some
>> @@ -486,9 +489,13 @@ static int comparefunc(const struct dirent 
>> **dentry1,
>>        * Therefore, we get the wrong sorted order like 
>> memory@...00000 and
>>        * memory@...0000.
>>        */
>> -    if (strchr(str1, '@') && strchr(str2, '@') &&
>> -        (strlen(str1) > strlen(str2)))
>> -        return 1;
>> +    if (ptr1 && ptr2) {
>> +        len1 = ptr1 - str1;
>> +        len2 = ptr2 - str2;
>> +        if (!strncmp(str1, str2, len1 >len2 ? len1: len2) &&
>> +                    (strlen(str1) > strlen(str2)))
>> +                return 1;
>> +    }
>>         return strcmp(str1, str2);
>>   }
>
>
>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/