linux-kernel - [PATCH 1/5] x86/boot: undef memcmp before providing a new definition

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: <1395170800-11059-2-git-send-email-vgoyal@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 18 Mar 2014 15:26:36 -0400
From:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hpa@...or.com
Cc:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] x86/boot: undef memcmp before providing a new definition

With CONFIG_X86_32=y, string_32.h gets pulled in compressed/string.c by
"misch.h". string_32.h defines a macro to map memcmp to __builtin_memcmp().
And that macro in turn changes the name of memcmp() defined here and
converts it to __builtin_memcmp().

I thought that's not the intention though. We probably want to provide
our own optimized definition of memcmp(). If yes, then undef the memcmp
before we define a new memcmp.

Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
---
 arch/x86/boot/compressed/string.c | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/string.c b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/string.c
index ffb9c5c..212004e 100644
--- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/string.c
+++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/string.c
@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
 #include "misc.h"
 
+/* Avoid intereference from any defines in string_32.h */
+#undef memcmp
 int memcmp(const void *s1, const void *s2, size_t len)
 {
 	u8 diff;
-- 
1.8.5.3

--
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/