linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/6] x86_64: Enable arch-generic vsyscall support.

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]

Message-Id: <200608090459.05028.ak@suse.de>
Date:	Wed, 9 Aug 2006 04:59:05 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To:	john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/6] x86_64: Enable arch-generic vsyscall support.

On Wednesday 09 August 2006 04:56, john stultz wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 04:29 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > diff --git a/kernel/timer.c b/kernel/timer.c
> > > index b650f04..08b4a02 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/timer.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/timer.c
> > > @@ -1023,6 +1023,12 @@ static int __init timekeeping_init_devic
> > >  
> > >  device_initcall(timekeeping_init_device);
> > >  
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_TIME_VSYSCALL
> > > +extern void update_vsyscall(struct timespec* ts, struct clocksource* c);
> > > +#else
> > > +#define update_vsyscall(now, c)
> > > +#endif
> > 
> > Using a weak dummy function would be a bit cleaner.
> 
> Will compilers optimize out the call properly?

No, but it's just a call ; ret then.

> 
> Looking at it now, it probably should go in a .h file and the empty
> define should be a proper "do { } while(0)" 

Or use weak

-Andi

 
-
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/