linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/mm/dump_pagetables: Change to use DEFINE_SHOW

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: <dd78fa9f-f27c-1579-1bc3-0b63acf54672@intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 28 Nov 2018 10:44:57 -0800
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Yangtao Li <tiny.windzz@...il.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mm/dump_pagetables: Change to use
 DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE macro

On 11/27/18 2:50 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 9:06 AM, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> wrote:
>> On 11/19/18 7:43 AM, Yangtao Li wrote:
>>> -static const struct file_operations ptdump_curusr_fops = {
>>> -     .owner          = THIS_MODULE,
>>> -     .open           = ptdump_open_curusr,
>>> -     .read           = seq_read,
>>> -     .llseek         = seq_lseek,
>>> -     .release        = single_release,
>>> -};
>>> +DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE(ptdump_curusr);
>>
>> FWIW, I rather dislike this conversion and the DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE()
>> approach in general.  It makes it basically impossible to go from
>> ptdump_curusr to ptdump_open_curusr without opening up the macro and
>> reverse-engineering it.
>>
>> My test is that for these macros to be sane, I need to be able to find
>> "ptdump_open_curusr" by grepping for "ptdump_curusr".  This fails the test.
> 
> Er, "ptdump_curusr" matches the generated name "ptdump_curusr_show",
> is that what you mean?

Ahh, I also missed some of the renames to make this OK, like:

> -static int ptdump_show_efi(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
> +static int ptdump_efi_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)

I thought there was some macro magic going on that screwed the names up.

This looks fine to me.

Reviewed-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>