linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scripts/gdb: Add command to check list consistency

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]

Message-ID: <5538E373.5070009@siemens.com>
Date:	Thu, 23 Apr 2015 14:20:03 +0200
From:	Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
To:	Thiébaud Weksteen <thiebaud@...steen.fr>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scripts/gdb: Add command to check list consistency

On 2015-04-23 14:10, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2015-04-22 09:32, Thiébaud Weksteen wrote:
>> +    nb = 0
>> +    list_head_ptr_type = list_head.get_type().pointer()
>> +    c = head.cast(list_head_ptr_type)
> 
> Why casting? Is it a common use case to not have the list head as a
> variable at hand? The user could still do
> 
> lx_list_check (struct list_head *)0x...
> 
> when needed.

Specifically, this fails in a non-obvious way right now:

(gdb) lx-check-list workqueues

If you look at lx_thread_info, e.g., it accepts both objects and pointers.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SES-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
--
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/