linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] augmented rbtree: add new RB_DECLARE_CALLBACKS

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]

Date:   Fri, 26 Jul 2019 18:44:19 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
Cc:     Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" <urezki@...il.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] augmented rbtree: add new
 RB_DECLARE_CALLBACKS_MAX macro

On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 05:24:09 -0700 Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com> wrote:

> Syncing up with v5.2, I see that there is a new use for augmented
> rbtrees in mm/vmalloc.c which does not compile after applying my
> patchset.
> 
> It's an easy fix though:

It still doesn't build.

lib/rbtree_test.c: In function check_augmented:
lib/rbtree_test.c:225:35: error: implicit declaration of function augment_recompute [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
   WARN_ON_ONCE(node->augmented != augment_recompute(node));

I think I'll just do this:

--- a/lib/rbtree_test.c~augmented-rbtree-add-new-rb_declare_callbacks_max-macro-fix-2
+++ a/lib/rbtree_test.c
@@ -220,10 +220,6 @@ static void check_augmented(int nr_nodes
 	struct rb_node *rb;
 
 	check(nr_nodes);
-	for (rb = rb_first(&root.rb_root); rb; rb = rb_next(rb)) {
-		struct test_node *node = rb_entry(rb, struct test_node, rb);
-		WARN_ON_ONCE(node->augmented != augment_recompute(node));
-	}
 }
 
 static int __init rbtree_test_init(void)

although there may be something we can do here to restore the lost
coverage?