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]
Date:	Thu, 3 Jan 2013 10:38:15 +0000
From:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To:	kpark3469@...il.com
Cc:	rostedt@...dmis.org, fweisbec@...il.com, mingo@...hat.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	sahara <keun-o.park@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm: make return_address available for ARM_UNWIND

On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 07:12:29PM +0900, kpark3469@...il.com wrote:
> -#if defined(CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER) && !defined(CONFIG_ARM_UNWIND)
> +#if defined(CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER) || defined(CONFIG_ARM_UNWIND)
>  /*
>   * return_address uses walk_stackframe to do it's work.  If both
>   * CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER=y and CONFIG_ARM_UNWIND=y walk_stackframe uses unwind
> - * information.  For this to work in the function tracer many functions would
> - * have to be marked with __notrace.  So for now just depend on
> - * !CONFIG_ARM_UNWIND.

So what have you done about the issue referred in this comment?  Or do you
believe that fixing warnings (even if they are explicit #warning statements)
is far more important than code being functionally correct?
--
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