linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -tip ] [BUGFIX] kprobes: Move hash

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: <514023AA.4070004@hitachi.com>
Date:	Wed, 13 Mar 2013 15:58:50 +0900
From:	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Timo Juhani Lindfors <timo.lindfors@....fi>,
	Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
	Nadia Yvette Chambers <nyc@...omorphy.com>,
	yrl.pp-manager.tt@...achi.com,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip ] [BUGFIX] kprobes: Move hash_64() into .text.kprobe
 section

(2013/03/13 1:04), Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 7:22 AM, Masami Hiramatsu
> <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com> wrote:
>> Beacuse hash_64() is called from the get_kprobe() inside
>> int3 handler, kernel causes int3 recursion and crashes if
>> kprobes user puts a probe on it.
>>
>> Usually hash_64() is inlined into caller function, but in
>> some cases, it has instances by gcc's interprocedural
>> constant propagation.
>>
>> This patch adds __kprobes tag on the hash_64()
> 
> NAK. Don't do this. Just force inlining. There's absolutely no way we
> want to start adding __kprobe to random helper functions like this.

I see.

> This isn't even about where "__kprobes" exists and whether we want to
> include the header file. This is about the fact that hash64 has
> absolutely *nothing* to do with kprobes, and we simply shouldn't do
> crap like this regardless of whether we need a new #include or not.

OK, then I'll update it to just use __always_inline.

Thank you!

-- 
Masami HIRAMATSU
IT Management Research Dept. Linux Technology Center
Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory
E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com


--
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/