linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH REBASED RESEND] x86/cpu: Move early cpu initialization into a separate translation unit

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: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1806221603150.2402@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:   Fri, 22 Jun 2018 16:05:47 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH REBASED RESEND] x86/cpu: Move early cpu initialization
 into a separate translation unit

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:

> __pgtable_l5_enabled shouldn't be needed after system has booted, we can
> mark it as __initdata, but it requires preparation.
> 
> This patch moves early cpu initialization into a separate translation
> unit. This limits effect of USE_EARLY_PGTABLE_L5 to less code.
> 
> Without the change cpu_init() uses __pgtable_l5_enabled. cpu_init() is
> not __init function and it leads to section mismatch.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>

Second thoughts.

The only place where __pgtable_l5_enabled() is used in common.c is in
early_identify_cpu() which is marked __init. So how is that section
mismatch triggered?

Thanks,

	tglx