linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] powerpc/ptrace: Add prototype for function pt_regs

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: <CA+7wUswX34amxhJW827tm9zmSaq6T9NvEpxWpgcofGNL=3Kmxg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 Feb 2019 09:46:01 +0100
From:   Mathieu Malaterre <malat@...ian.org>
To:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
Cc:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/ptrace: Add prototype for function pt_regs_check

On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 9:21 AM Christophe Leroy
<christophe.leroy@....fr> wrote:
>
>
>
> Le 15/02/2019 à 09:11, Mathieu Malaterre a écrit :
> > On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 4:46 PM Mathieu Malaterre <malat@...ian.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> `pt_regs_check` is a dummy function, its purpose is to break the build
> >> if struct pt_regs and struct user_pt_regs don't match.
> >>
> >> This function has no functionnal purpose, and will get eliminated at
> >> link time or after init depending on CONFIG_LD_DEAD_CODE_DATA_ELIMINATION
> >>
> >> This commit adds a prototype to fix warning at W=1:
> >>
> >>    arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c:3339:13: error: no previous prototype for ‘pt_regs_check’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
> >>
> >> Suggested-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
> >> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@...ian.org>
> >> ---
> >>   arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c | 4 ++++
> >>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c
> >> index a398999d0770..341c0060b4c8 100644
> >> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c
> >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c
> >> @@ -3338,6 +3338,10 @@ void do_syscall_trace_leave(struct pt_regs *regs)
> >>          user_enter();
> >>   }
> >>
> >> +void __init pt_regs_check(void);
> >> +/* dummy function, its purpose is to break the build if struct pt_regs and
> >> + * struct user_pt_regs don't match.
> >> + */
> >
> > Another trick which seems to work with GCC is:
> >
> > -void __init pt_regs_check(void)
> > +static inline void __init pt_regs_check(void)
>
> Does this really work ? Did you test to ensure that the BUILD_BUG_ON
> still detect mismatch between struct pt_regs and struct user_pt_regs ?
>

My bad, I was unaware of GCC behavior for static inline in this case.
Sorry for the noise.
Original ugly patch does work though.
>
> >
> >>   void __init pt_regs_check(void)
> >>   {
> >>          BUILD_BUG_ON(offsetof(struct pt_regs, gpr) !=
> >> --
> >> 2.19.2
> >>