linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v14 1/3] /proc/pid/status: Add support for architecture specific output

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: <CALCETrWD4H8zZVD+Mk+=1VWmYNWx=aC7w+LOi8KqoSpAFgD--Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 9 Apr 2019 19:25:29 -0700
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To:     "Li, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, aubrey.li@...el.com,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 1/3] /proc/pid/status: Add support for architecture
 specific output

On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 7:20 PM Li, Aubrey <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 2019/4/10 9:58, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 6:55 PM Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> The architecture specific information of the running processes could
> >> be useful to the userland. Add support to examine process architecture
> >> specific information externally.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>
> >> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> >> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
> >> Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
> >> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
> >> Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
> >> Cc: Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
> >> Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
> >> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> >> ---
> >>  fs/proc/array.c         | 5 +++++
> >>  include/linux/proc_fs.h | 2 ++
> >>  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/fs/proc/array.c b/fs/proc/array.c
> >> index 2edbb657f859..331592a61718 100644
> >> --- a/fs/proc/array.c
> >> +++ b/fs/proc/array.c
> >> @@ -401,6 +401,10 @@ static inline void task_thp_status(struct seq_file *m, struct mm_struct *mm)
> >>         seq_printf(m, "THP_enabled:\t%d\n", thp_enabled);
> >>  }
> >>
> >> +void __weak arch_proc_pid_status(struct seq_file *m, struct task_struct *task)
> >> +{
> >> +}
> >
> > This pointlessly bloats other architectures.  Do this instead in an
> > appropriate header:
> >
> > #ifndef arch_proc_pid_status
> > static inline void arch_proc_pid_status(...)
> > {
> > }
> > #endif
> >
>
> I saw a bunch of similar weak functions, is it not acceptable?
>
> fs/proc$ grep weak *.c
> cpuinfo.c:__weak void arch_freq_prepare_all(void)
> meminfo.c:void __attribute__((weak)) arch_report_meminfo(struct seq_file *m)
> vmcore.c:int __weak elfcorehdr_alloc(unsigned long long *addr, unsigned long long *size)
> vmcore.c:void __weak elfcorehdr_free(unsigned long long addr)
> vmcore.c:ssize_t __weak elfcorehdr_read(char *buf, size_t count, u64 *ppos)
> vmcore.c:ssize_t __weak elfcorehdr_read_notes(char *buf, size_t count, u64 *ppos)
> vmcore.c:int __weak remap_oldmem_pfn_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> vmcore.c:ssize_t __weak

I think they're acceptable, but I don't personally like them.

>
> > Or add /proc/PID/x86_status, which sounds better in most respects to me.
> >
>
> I didn't figure out how to make /proc/PID/x86_status invisible to other
> architectures in an appropriate way, do you have any suggestions?

#ifdef CONFIG_X86?