linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] ia64: reuse append_elf_note() and final

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: <87tw8umged.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
Date:   Fri, 20 Jan 2017 16:47:38 +1100
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:     Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     fenghua.yu@...el.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
        linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, dyoung@...hat.com,
        kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
        Mahesh J Salgaonkar <mahesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        ebiederm@...ssion.com, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        vgoyal@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] ia64: reuse append_elf_note() and final_note() functions

Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:

> Get rid of multiple definitions of append_elf_note() & final_note()
> functions. Reuse these functions compiled under CONFIG_CRASH_CORE
> Also, define Elf_Word and use it instead of generic u32 or the more
> specific Elf64_Word.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>
> Changes from v3:
> * Dropped hard-coded values and used DIV_ROUND_UP().
>
> Changes from v2:
> * Added a definition for Elf_Word.
> * Used IA64 version of append_elf_note() and final_note() functions.
>
>
>  arch/ia64/kernel/crash.c   |   22 ----------------------
>  include/linux/crash_core.h |    4 ++++
>  include/linux/elf.h        |    2 ++
>  kernel/crash_core.c        |   34 ++++++++++++++--------------------
>  kernel/kexec_core.c        |   28 ----------------------------
>  5 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 70 deletions(-)

Do the powerpc patches later in the series actually depend on this one?
Or is this just an unrelated cleanup?

As it is I can't merge the series until we at least get an ack on this
from the ia64 folks.

If you can just split this out as a separate patch that would make it a
lot easier to get the rest merged.

cheers