linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -tip v3 5/7] x86: kprobes: Ignore break

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]

Date:   Fri, 18 May 2018 22:42:18 +0900
From:   Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, x86@...nel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip v3 5/7] x86: kprobes: Ignore break_handler

On Fri, 18 May 2018 08:26:38 +0200
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:

> 
> * Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> > Remove break_handler related code since that was used
> > only for jprobe and jprobe is removed now.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/common.h |   10 ----------
> >  arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c   |   13 ++-----------
> >  arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/ftrace.c |   16 ++--------------
> >  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
> 
> Even after this change there's a stale reference to ->break_handler():
> 
>   arch/x86/include/asm/kprobes.h:  * a post_handler or break_handler).
> 
> Please use 'git grep'!

Oops, I missed it. Thank you, I'll use git-grep next time.

> 
> Also, there's no reason to send an incomplete series: please remove _all_ 
> ->break_handler() references so that it's 100% gone! The pain of having and not 
> having ->break_handler() is completely unnecessary.

Would you mean a single patch for all arch?
I'm currently has arch-separated patches for removing it. Should I fold those?

Thank you,

-- 
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>