linux-kernel - Re: [patch 11/12] softirq: Allow inlining do_softirq_own

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

Date:   Tue, 09 Feb 2021 21:43:13 +0100
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai+lkml@...il.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 11/12] softirq: Allow inlining do_softirq_own_stack()

Lai,

On Fri, Feb 05 2021 at 12:38, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 05 2021 at 18:14, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 10:04 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>>>  static inline void do_softirq_own_stack(void)
>>>  {
>>
>> Hello
>>
>> This patch and the next patch have three "#if[n]def" with
>> __ARCH_HAS_DO_SOFTIRQ_INLINE and this one is nested in
>> __ARCH_HAS_DO_SOFTIRQ.
>>
>> I wonder if we can use __ARCH_HAS_DO_SOFTIRQ only.
>>
>> For example, we can move "void do_softirq_own_stack(void);" to around
>> the code where __ARCH_HAS_DO_SOFTIRQ are defined in very ARCHs.
>> (And for x86, do_softirq_own_stack() is a macro instead of function
>> declaration as next patch shows)
>
> We can do that as well. No strong preference.

actually it's not that trivial. It ends up in include hell and then
pulls the whole irq stack macro mess into every file which includes
interrupt.h.

I've moved the default function prototype and the stub into
asm-generic/softirq_stack.h and let x86 override it.

Thanks,

        tglx