linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] namespace: fix namespace.pl script to support relative paths

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:   Wed, 23 Oct 2019 21:34:06 +0000
From:   "Keller, Jacob E" <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
To:     Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
CC:     "intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kbuild <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] namespace: fix namespace.pl script to support relative
 paths

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2019 10:22 PM
> To: Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>; Randy Dunlap
> <rdunlap@...radead.org>
> Cc: intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-kbuild
> <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] namespace: fix namespace.pl script to support relative
> paths
> 
> This scripts has been 5-year broken,
> and I did not see any complaint except from you.
> So, I wonder how many people are using this.
> 
> Nor, do I understand how to use it.
> 
> Could you teach me a bit more about this script?
> 
> 
> 
> Something might be missing in my mind, but
> I do not know how to use this script in a useful way.
> 
> 
> 
> It provides three checks.
> 
> [1] list_multiply_defined()
> 
> This warns multiple definition of functions.
> 
> The compiler would fail if it saw any multiple definition,
> so the reports from this check are all false-positive.
> 
> 
> [2] resolve_external_references()
> 
> This warns unresolved symbols.
> 
> The compiler would fail if it saw any unresolved symbol,
> so the reports from this check are all false-positive, too.
> 
> 

The compiler won't necessarily fail when building modules, because the symbol might be in another loadable module.

> 
> 
> [3] list_extra_externals
> 
> This warns symbols with no reference.
> 
> This potentially contains lots of false-positives.
> For example, the core framework provides APIs, but if all drivers
> are disabled, there is no user of those APIs.
> 

We use this to help verify that driver modules do not expose symbols.

Thanks,
Jake