linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] gcov: combine common code

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: <816c7845-2ba5-2af2-6632-842f8d207633@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Fri, 19 Mar 2021 18:25:22 +0100
From:   Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] gcov: combine common code

On 15.03.2021 23:54, Johannes Berg wrote:
> From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>
> 
> There's a lot of duplicated code between gcc and clang
> implementations, move it over to fs.c to simplify the
> code, there's no reason to believe that for small data
> like this one would not just implement the simple
> convert_to_gcda() function.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>

I successfully tested this patch set using GCC on s390, but had some
problems using Clang with gcov-kernel (which seem unrelated to this
patch set - still to be investigated).

The removal of duplicated code definitively makes sense and this
approach looks like it will help make the build-time test I have in mind
for gcov-kernel easier to implement.

As such, for all 3 patches (not sure if it makes a difference seeing
that this has already landed in linux-next):

Acked-by: Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@...ux.ibm.com>

Regards,
  Peter

-- 
Peter Oberparleiter
Linux on Z Development - IBM Germany