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:	Tue, 5 Jul 2011 03:46:46 +0530
From:	Raghavendra D Prabhu <rprabhu@...hang.net>
To:	Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk>
Cc:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com,
	xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Modpost section mismatch fix

* On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 09:49:48AM +0100, Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk> wrote:
>On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 04:55 +0530, Raghavendra D Prabhu wrote:
>> [Sorry if duplicate, one earlier was corrupt]

>> Hi,
>>      I got section mismatches reported by modpost in latest build. It got
>>      reported for xen_register_pirq and xen_unplug_emulated_devices
>>      functions.
>
>
>>  xen_register_pirq makes reference to
>>      acpi_sci_override_gsi in init.data section; marking
>>      xen_register_pirq with __init is not feasible since calls are made
>>      to it from acpi_register_gsi in non-init contexts. So marking it
>>      __refdata based on assumption that when acpi_sci_override_gsi is
>>      referenced, it is in  early stages where it is alive.
>
>I don't think this assumption holds, since xen_register_pirq can be
>called at any time and basically unconditionally references
>acpi_sci_override_gsi.

Yeah, that has been my guess as well, however I am not privy to the
inner workings of Xen, so was not sure.
>
>If we don't want to remove the __init from acpi_sci_override_gsi then
>perhaps xen_setup_acpi_sci needs to stash it somewhere?
>
>Or maybe xen_register_pirq could take an "int force_irq" which, if not
>-1, would force a particular IRQ. The callsite in xen_setup_acpi_sci
>(actually via xen_register_gsi so the param would need to be propagated
>there) would be the only actual user?

xen_register_gsi and hence, xen_register_pirq are called from
init (with xen_setup_acpi_sci) and non-init (with
acpi_register_gsi_xen); since xen_set_acpi_sci calls it with gsi ==
acpi_sci_override_gsi and is marked __init, the best way would be to
call xen_register_gsi and xen_register_pirq with a boolean argument like
sci_override to obviate the need to use acpi_sci_override_gsi in
register_pirq. I will send the patch with this change if it looks good.


>
>The xen_unplug_emulated_devices change looks correct to me since
>xen_unplug_emulated_devices is called from xen_arch_hvm_post_suspend.
>
>Ian.
>


>> --------------------------
>> Raghavendra Prabhu
>> GPG Id : 0xD72BE977
>> Fingerprint: B93F EBCB 8E05 7039 CD3C A4B8 A616 DCA1 D72B E977
>> www: wnohang.net
>> _______________________________________________
>> Virtualization mailing list
>> Virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
>> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ