linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 3/6] objtool: arm64: Adapt the stack frame checks and the section analysis for the arm architecture

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 9 Apr 2019 18:12:04 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Raphael Gault <raphael.gault@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        jpoimboe@...hat.com, catalin.marinas@....com, will.deacon@....com,
        julien.thierry@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC 3/6] objtool: arm64: Adapt the stack frame checks and the
 section analysis for the arm architecture


I'm just doing my initial read-through,.. however

On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 02:52:40PM +0100, Raphael Gault wrote:
> +		if (!(sec->sh.sh_flags & SHF_EXECINSTR)
> +			&& (strcmp(sec->name, ".altinstr_replacement") || !IGNORE_SHF_EXEC_FLAG))
>  			continue;

could you please not format code like that. Operators go at the end of
the line, and continuation should match the indentation of the opening
paren. So the above would look like:

> +		if (!(sec->sh.sh_flags & SHF_EXECINSTR) &&
> +		    (strcmp(sec->name, ".altinstr_replacement") || !IGNORE_SHF_EXEC_FLAG))
>  			continue;

You appear to be doing that quit consistently, and it is against style.