linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] i386: fix section mismatches for init code with!HOTPLUG

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

Message-Id: <4A8BB7B802000078000107DC@vpn.id2.novell.com>
Date:	Wed, 19 Aug 2009 07:28:40 +0100
From:	"Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...ell.com>
To:	"Robert Richter" <robert.richter@....com>
Cc:	<mingo@...e.hu>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386: fix section mismatches for init code
	 with!HOTPLUG_CPU

>>> Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com> 18.08.09 19:57 >>>
>On 18.08.09 16:41:33, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> Commit 0e83815be719d3391bf5ea24b7fe696c07dbd417 changed the section the
>> initial_code variable gets allocated in, in an attempt to address a
>> section conflict warning. This, however created a new section conflict
>> when building without HOTPLUG_CPU. The apparently only (reasonable) way
>> to address this is to always use __REFDATA.
>
>Hmm, not sure if I am missing something, but my patch actually
>shouldn't have changed the !HOTPLUG_CPU case:

Correct, but it also didn't take care of it, despite changing the code in
question.

Jan

--
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/