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]
Message-ID: <20110705141323.GG2972@dumpdata.com>
Date:	Tue, 5 Jul 2011 10:13:23 -0400
From:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
To:	Raghavendra D Prabhu <rprabhu@...hang.net>
Cc:	Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk>, 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 Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 03:46:46AM +0530, Raghavendra D Prabhu wrote:
> * 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.

Hold on, let me rebase #stable/pci.cleanups and see if the issue
here disappears.
--
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