linux-kernel - Re: [Cocci] Re: status of constification

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:	Sat, 13 Nov 2010 13:13:28 +0100
From:	Emese Revfy <re.emese@...il.com>
To:	Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
CC:	Kees Cook <kees.cook@...onical.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	cocci@...u.dk, Lionel Debroux <lionel_debroux@...oo.fr>,
	Brad Spengler <spender@...ecurity.net>
Subject: Re: [Cocci] Re: status of constification

>>> What would the right approach be?  It is not obvious to find 100% of the 
>>> header files, because some of them depend on information in Makefiles.  
>>
>> For 100% coverage you can look at how the Linux Makefiles invoke sparse.
> 
> I haven't looked at it, but I doubt it gives 100% coverage, because one 
> can have code in both the if and else branches of an ifdef.  I would 
> imagine that it gives 100% coverage for whatever architecture you would be 
> compiling for?

For my purposes it's enough to find all includes for a given .config.

What would be also useful is if Coccinelle could somehow ignore ifdef's that
guard code blocks so that it would analyse all code in a translation unit. 

Thanks Emese

--
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/