linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86 (Linux Tiny): configure out support for some processors

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:	Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:15:20 -0600
From:	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Michael Opdenacker <michael-lists@...e-electrons.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Linux-tiny@...enic.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86 (Linux Tiny): configure out support
	for	some	processors


On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 16:54 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Matt Mackall wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 15:01 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >> Matt Mackall wrote:
> >>> Best would be to have no ifdefs and do it all with linker magic, of
> >>> course. But that's trickier.
> >>>
> >> I concur with this, definitely.
> > 
> > Ok, so let's come up with a plan. We can:
> > 
> > a) use weak symbols, ala cond_syscall
> > b) use a special section
> > c) use early_init code (is it early enough?)
> > c) have some sort of registration list
> > 
> > Having a generic cond_call of some sort might be nice for this sort of
> > thing.
> > 
> 
> c) is out, because this has to be executed after the early generic code 
> and before the late generic code.
> 
> b) would be my first choice, and yes, it would be a good thing to have a 
> generalized mechanism for this.  For the registrant, it's pretty easy: 
> just add a macro that adds a pointer to a named section.  We then need a 
> way to get the base address and length of each such section in order to 
> be able to execute each function in sequence.

I like the idea of making a generalized hook section. But this is a bit
burdensome for Michael's little patch (unless you have time to whip
something up) so I think we should probably explore it separately.

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.

--
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/