linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] kallsyms: add kallsyms_show

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]

Message-ID: <Yl/ns04PGU8ahIKJ@alley>
Date:   Wed, 20 Apr 2022 13:00:03 +0200
From:   Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To:     Maninder Singh <maninder1.s@...sung.com>,
        "mcgrof@...nel.org" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc:     "rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        "senozhatsky@...omium.org" <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
        "andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com" 
        <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com" <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
        "wedsonaf@...gle.com" <wedsonaf@...gle.com>,
        "boqun.feng@...il.com" <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        "christophe.leroy@...roup.eu" <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        "swboyd@...omium.org" <swboyd@...omium.org>,
        "ojeda@...nel.org" <ojeda@...nel.org>,
        "ast@...nel.org" <ast@...nel.org>,
        "gary@...yguo.net" <gary@...yguo.net>,
        "mbenes@...e.cz" <mbenes@...e.cz>,
        "ndesaulniers@...gle.com" <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        "void@...ifault.com" <void@...ifault.com>,
        "jolsa@...nel.org" <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vaneet Narang <v.narang@...sung.com>,
        Onkarnath <onkarnath.1@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] kallsyms: add kallsyms_show_value definition in all
 cases

On Mon 2022-04-18 10:04:42, Maninder Singh wrote:
> > It is really weird that the function is declared in kallsyms.h
> > and implemented in vsprintf.c.
> >
> 
> Yes it does not look good.
> Initially we thought to make it as static inline function in kallsyms.h only.
> But as function is little big and it will increase code size, so we added
> definition in vsprintf.c, because its alwyas compilable code and also it has
> some wrapper APIs for kallsyms.
>  
> But as you suggested to make a new file, it will be good.
> 
> > What about splitting kallsyms.c into two source files where one
> > would be always compiled? It would be usable also for the
> > spring function introduced by
> > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220323164742.2984281-1-maninder1.s@samsung.com
> > 
> > It might be something like kallsyms_full.c and/or kallsyms_tiny.c.
> >
> 
> This patch is not taken by Luis yet in module-tetsing branch.
> So what will be the best approach to make new version of this patch ?

I am not sure about Luis' plans and if the patch applies on top of
the current module.c split patchset (linux-next).


> A) to make new file kallsyms_tiny.c and add only one definition in that file
> and when above patch of spring functions is merged in next we can move definitions
> to new file
>
> or
> 
> B) we send patch to Luis's branch of module-testing with moving definition(of earlier patch)
> to new file and current patch also.

I wonder how many conflicts it might cause. The patchset splitting
module.c actually does not touch kernel/kallsyms.c.

Anyway, I would probably prepare it on top of linux-next.

Best Regards,
Petr