linux-kernel - [ 42/95] x86: Fix section mismatch on load_ucode

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: <20130625182158.391138063@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 25 Jun 2013 11:32:29 -0700
From:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	stable@...r.kernel.org,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: [ 42/95] x86: Fix section mismatch on load_ucode_ap

3.9-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>

commit 949785996ec2250fa958fc3a924e5186e9a8fa2c upstream.

We are in the process of removing all the __cpuinit annotations.
While working on making that change, an existing problem was
made evident:

  WARNING: arch/x86/kernel/built-in.o(.text+0x198f2): Section mismatch
  in reference from the function cpu_init() to the function
  .init.text:load_ucode_ap()   The function cpu_init() references
  the function __init load_ucode_ap().  This is often because cpu_init
  lacks a __init annotation or the annotation of load_ucode_ap is wrong.

This now appears because in my working tree, cpu_init() is no longer
tagged as __cpuinit, and so the audit picks up the mismatch.  The 2nd
hypothesis from the audit is the correct one, as there was an incorrect
__init tag on the prototype in the header (but __cpuinit was used on
the function itself.)

The audit is telling us that the prototype's __init annotation took
effect and the function did land in the .init.text section.  Checking
with objdump on a mainline tree that still has __cpuinit shows that
the __cpuinit on the function takes precedence over the __init on the
prototype, but that won't be true once we make __cpuinit a no-op.

Even though we are removing __cpuinit, we temporarily align both
the function and the prototype on __cpuinit so that the changeset
can be applied to stable trees  if desired.

[ hpa: build fix only, no object code change ]

Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1371654926-11729-1-git-send-email-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h
@@ -60,11 +60,11 @@ static inline void __exit exit_amd_micro
 #ifdef CONFIG_MICROCODE_EARLY
 #define MAX_UCODE_COUNT 128
 extern void __init load_ucode_bsp(void);
-extern __init void load_ucode_ap(void);
+extern void __cpuinit load_ucode_ap(void);
 extern int __init save_microcode_in_initrd(void);
 #else
 static inline void __init load_ucode_bsp(void) {}
-static inline __init void load_ucode_ap(void) {}
+static inline void __cpuinit load_ucode_ap(void) {}
 static inline int __init save_microcode_in_initrd(void)
 {
 	return 0;

--
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/