linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] module: make symbol_put_addr() work for all exported symbols

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200806260137.04707.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date:	Thu, 26 Jun 2008 01:37:04 +1000
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, llipavsky@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH] module: make symbol_put_addr() work for all exported symbols

On Wednesday 25 June 2008 18:37:37 Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2008, Rusty Russell wrote:
> >    It might be better to centralize all these iterators, and create a
> > proper iterator function.  Any chance you could rewrite it on top of
> > this patch? (Lightly tested)
>
> Hi Rusty,

Hi Jiri,

> I see two options how to do this -- either I can make 'value' input
> parameter too, so that find_symbol_in_section() could perform lookup
> either according to address or according to name (whatever is specified in
> the passed struct find_symbol_arg), or I can do a completely new lookup
> function for address-wise lookups. What would you prefer? I don't have any
> strong preference either way.

A new lookup function (and hence a new structure) I think.  It'll be clearer.

Cheers,
Rusty.
--
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/