linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Section mismatch contig_page_data and bootmem_node

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080821000844.GA10031@joi>
Date:	Thu, 21 Aug 2008 02:08:48 +0200
From:	Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@...il.com>
To:	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...urebad.de>
Cc:	Sean MacLennan <smaclennan@...atech.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Section mismatch contig_page_data and bootmem_node_data

On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 11:45:00PM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 21:05:41 +0200
> > Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I thought about this warning today and found 2 other solutions:
> >> 1) Mark contig_page_data as __ref (but it might hide real bugs).
> >> 2) Remove bdata from struct pglist_data and access it directly through
> >>    bootmem_node_data. It requires passing node number to all functions
> >>    which use bdata, but unfortunately arch/ia64/mm/discontig.c handles
> >>    node numbering its own way. I'm still investigating it.
> 
> Yeah, I gave it a shot once too but dropped it again after I looked at
> ia64 code.
> 
> Perhaps we can just remove the static assignment and do it at boot up?

That won't work - modpost will warn at different place about section
mismatch. But even if it would work, we lose potentially useful
analysis of all uses of pglist_data->bdata.

But I think I found better solution - replace "struct bootmem_data *bdata"
in struct pglist_data with "int bootmem_node;" and change all uses of bdata
to &bootmem_node_data[struct pglist_data *->bootmem_node].

What do you think about it? Would it be acceptable?

PS: restored cc'ing LKML

Marcin
--
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/