linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 4/8] kallsyms: introduce sections needed to map symbols to built-in modules

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: <76d7ba29-c7d2-d082-5928-599844112494@huawei.com>
Date:   Tue, 15 Nov 2022 19:47:27 +0800
From:   "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>
To:     Nick Alcock <nick.alcock@...cle.com>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
CC:     <masahiroy@...nel.org>, <linux-modules@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <arnd@...db.de>,
        <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <eugene.loh@...cle.com>,
        <kris.van.hees@...cle.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 4/8] kallsyms: introduce sections needed to map symbols
 to built-in modules



On 2022/11/15 1:04, Nick Alcock wrote:
> On 13 Nov 2022, Luis Chamberlain outgrape:
> 
>> On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 01:41:28PM +0000, Nick Alcock wrote:
>>> The mapping consists of three new symbols
>>
>> The entire commit log does not describe *why*.
> 
> ... because it's in the other commit logs and the cover letter. I can
> repeat the motivation in this log too if you like.
> 
>> Can I also trouble you to rebase on top of modules-next [0]
> 
> Sure!
> 
>> Does the kallsyms loop more than 3 times now with Zhen Lei's work and
>> your new symbols on top on a allyesconfig build?
> 
> I don't understand the question, sorry. If this is about the number of
> KALLSYMS invocations in the kernel build, that should be unchanged by
> this patch. This was an explicit design goal because it's quite slow to
> run kallsyms more times and I was already feeling guilty about having to
> bring back the tristate recursion.
> 
> I haven't tried it with Zhen Lei's work: will try for the next
> iteration, as a matter of course after the rebase. (And, looking at the
> patch series at the top of modules-next, wow is that quite a hefty
> performance improvement. And a hefty memory usage increase :( I have a
> horrible feeling that one of my machines won't have enough memory to
> boot after this goes in, but it was terribly outdated anyway.)

It's only about 500K. It shouldn't be a problem. Your machine boot from flash?

> .
> 

-- 
Regards,
  Zhen Lei