linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] pop previous section in alternative.c

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: <20080410150544.GI10019@one.firstfloor.org>
Date:	Thu, 10 Apr 2008 17:05:44 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@...hat.com>,
	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, pinskia@....gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pop previous section in alternative.c

On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 07:46:25AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > 
> > So in summary valid section patterns are either
> > .section / .previous or .pushsection .section .popsection
> 
> The thing is, we'd be much better off with some sanity checking in the 
> assembler.
> 
> Which is likely not going to happen - oh well.

A simple way to detect it on the assembler level would be checking
that the section is the same after #NO_APP as before #APP

-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/