linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Xen bugfixes

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]

Date:	Thu, 10 Sep 2009 19:26:29 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	Stable Kernel <stable@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Xen bugfixes


* Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:

> On 09/09/09 22:16, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> +# Make sure __phys_addr has no stackprotector
> >> +nostackp := $(call cc-option, -fno-stack-protector)
> >> +CFLAGS_ioremap.o		:= $(nostackp)
> >> +
> >>     
> > Sure we could move __phys_addr into its own file and thus avoid 
> > turning off stackprotector for the rest of ioremap.c?
> >   
> 
> I'm not very keen on having zillions of tiny files just to cope 
> with the lack of per-function stackprotector disable.  I don't see 
> any code in ioremap.c that would really benefit from 
> stack-protector anyway; there are no local arrays.
> 
> At least __phys_addr and friends aren't terribly closely related 
> to ioremap so it would at least make some sense.

Agreed, i wouldnt do it just for the stackprotector benefit (it's 
really stupid that GCC does not allow per function exceptions) - but 
here __phys_addr() looked out of place a bit.

> [...]  Patch below.

Looks like a nice cleanup. Mind sticking it into your next pull 
request?

> >> +CFLAGS_mmu.o			:= $(nostackp)
> >>     
> > A similar argument could be made here - what proportion of mmu.c is 
> > affected?
> 
> More.  It would be a fairly arbitrary chunk of code to split out 
> into a separate file.

Ok - i'd not do it then.

> > Also, once the commits have hit upstream feel free bounce them 
> > to stable@...nel.org - they dont have Cc: <stable@...nel.org> 
> > tags for automatic back-merging requests. The fixes narrowly 
> > missed v2.6.31.
> >   
> 
> Will do.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/