linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] tracing: Use address-of operator on section symbols

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200326213444.GA390@ubuntu-m2-xlarge-x86>
Date:   Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:34:44 -0700
From:   Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tracing: Use address-of operator on section symbols

On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 05:31:52PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2020 12:46:52 -0700
> Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 10:33:12AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 19:00:04 -0700
> > > Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com> wrote:
> > >   
> > > > Gentle ping for review/acceptance.  
> > > 
> > > Hmm, my local patchwork had this patch rejected. I'll go and apply it, run
> > > some tests and see if it works. Perhaps I meant to reject v1 and
> > > accidentally rejected v2 :-/
> > > 
> > > Thanks for the ping!
> > > 
> > > -- Steve  
> > 
> > Hi Steve,
> > 
> > Did you ever get around to running any tests? If so, were there any
> > issues? This warning is one of two remaining across several different
> > configurations so I sent the patch to turn on the warning and I want
> > to make sure this gets picked up at some point:
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200326194155.29107-1-natechancellor@gmail.com/
> > 
> > If you have not had time, totally fine, I just want to make sure it does
> > not fall through the cracks again :)
> > 
> 
> I have applied it to my queue. But the code I have in with it failed my
> tests, and I'm just about to kick off another round (I believe I fixed
> everything). And hopefully if it all passes, I can get it out to my
> linux-next branch by tomorrow.
> 
> -- Steve

Awesome, thank you for the quick reply and keeping me in the loop!

Nathan