linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] livepatch: use lists to manage patches, objects and functions

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:00:40 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
To:     Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>
cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
        jpoimboe@...hat.com, jeyu@...nel.org, jikos@...nel.org,
        pmladek@...e.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] livepatch: use lists to manage patches, objects
 and functions


> diff --git a/kernel/livepatch/core.c b/kernel/livepatch/core.c
> index b9628e4..b7f77be 100644
> --- a/kernel/livepatch/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/livepatch/core.c
> @@ -608,6 +608,7 @@ static int klp_init_func(struct klp_object *obj, struct klp_func *func)
>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&func->stack_node);
>  	func->patched = false;
>  	func->transition = false;
> +	list_add(&func->func_entry, &obj->func_list);

I doubt it matters much, but would list_add_tail() be better? The order 
would then be the same in both linked list and static array.
  
>  	/* The format for the sysfs directory is <function,sympos> where sympos
>  	 * is the nth occurrence of this symbol in kallsyms for the patched
> @@ -689,7 +690,9 @@ static int klp_init_object(struct klp_patch *patch, struct klp_object *obj)
>  	if (ret)
>  		return ret;
>  
> -	klp_for_each_func(obj, func) {
> +	list_add(&obj->obj_entry, &patch->obj_list);

Here as well.

Miroslav