linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] printk: move dump stack related code to lib/dump

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: <20180209090018.GA7129@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 9 Feb 2018 17:00:18 +0800
From:   Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
To:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
Cc:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: move dump stack related code to lib/dump_stack.c

On 02/09/18 at 04:51pm, Dave Young wrote:
> On 02/09/18 at 05:42pm, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > On (02/09/18 16:27), Dave Young wrote:
> > > > Seems that those functions are still defined in printk header.
> > > > Did you test !CONFIG_PRINTK build?
> > 
> > Apparently dump_stack(void) is also in printk.h
> > 
> > extern asmlinkage void dump_stack(void) __cold;
> > 
> > so it's "OK" to keep those functions in printk.h, I guess. I thought
> > that dump_stack() had its own header file...
> 
> It has not unfortunately..  The build failed because we have dummy
> functions in printk.h and redefined in lib/dump_stack.c.  I'm hesitating
> to add #ifdef CONFIG_PRINTK in lib/dump_stack.c.

Maybe conditionally build dump_stack.o only when CONFIG_PRINTK is true,
but not sure if there are some historic reason this is not done before,
will do some testing see if it works.

> 
> > 
> > > !CONFIG_PRINTK will use the dummy functions in printk.h, I did not test
> > > the build, doing it now to double confirm..
> > 
> > Not sure. Please test.
> > 
> > 	-ss
> 
> Thanks
> Dave