linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/stacktrace: export save_stack_trace_tsk

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: <07491738-dfdb-deb4-7e25-f1c173dda773@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 27 Feb 2019 17:25:18 -0500
From:   Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...hat.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/stacktrace: export save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable

On 2/27/19 4:31 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Feb 2019, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> 
>> The ppc64le implementation of save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable() is
>> exported, so do the same with x86.
> 
> And what's the in tree module user of this? I can't find one and just
> because PPC has an export with no user is not a convincing argument to add
> another one. The proper solution is to remove the unused PPC export.
> 

Good point.

For that matter, I do see in-tree modules making use of 
save_stack_trace, but who is calling save_stack_trace_tsk (exported by 
most arches) and save_stack_trace_regs (exported by openrisc, powerpc, 
s390)?

-- Joe