linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][RFC] getting rid of stupid loop in BUG()

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:	Wed, 25 Jul 2007 10:36:49 -0700
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
CC:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, hpa@...or.com,
	kaos@....com.au, xyzzy@...akeasy.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] getting rid of stupid loop in BUG()

Al Viro wrote:
> Who said that we need to populate that section from asm?  Define
> a static variable in that section inside a block; identifier is
> not a problem, obviously.
>
> I'm not saying that it's not revolting, but it's not impossible.
>   

I tried that, but there's still no way of getting a pointer to the ud2a
instruction in there.  gcc just generates garbage if you try to use use
the &&label syntax on a label which isn't (potentially) the target of a
goto (it just gets placed somewhere random).

But there's a bigger problem than that.  If the BUG is in code which can
be replicated (ie inlined or unrolled), then it would also require
replicating the static variable...

    J
-
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/