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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 28 Aug 2018 07:13:00 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc:     tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/irqflags: mark native_restore_fl extern inline

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 02:40:09PM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> Fixes commit 208cbb325589 ("x86/irqflags: Provide a declaration for
> native_save_fl")
> 
> This should have been marked extern inline in order to pick up the out
> of line definition in arch/x86/kernel/irqflags.S.
> 
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # 4.18, 4.14, 4.9, 4.4
> Reported-by: Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk>
> Signed-off-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/include/asm/irqflags.h | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/irqflags.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/irqflags.h
> index c14f2a74b2be..15450a675031 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/irqflags.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/irqflags.h
> @@ -33,7 +33,8 @@ extern inline unsigned long native_save_fl(void)
>  	return flags;
>  }
>  
> -static inline void native_restore_fl(unsigned long flags)
> +extern inline void native_restore_fl(unsigned long flags);
> +extern inline void native_restore_fl(unsigned long flags)

This looks odd to me, but my coffee hasn't kicked in yet this morning.
Why do you need both lines here?  Shouldn't the actual function be
sufficient?  If not, a comment explaining this would be nice.

thanks,

greg k-h

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ