netdev - Re: iwlwifi: mvm: BACKPORT_WANT_DEV

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: <1414746518.3014.18.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net>
Date:	Fri, 31 Oct 2014 10:08:38 +0100
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
Cc:	Valentin Rothberg <valentinrothberg@...il.com>,
	Emmanuel Grumbach <emmanuel.grumbach@...el.com>,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
	Intel Linux Wireless <ilw@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: iwlwifi: mvm:  BACKPORT_WANT_DEV_COREDUMP?

On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 10:06 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 09:45 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 09:40 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
> > > Your commit aadede6e9f4c ("iwlwifi: mvm: port to devcoredump framework")
> > > landed in today's linux-next (next-20141031). It adds a select statement
> > > for BACKPORT_WANT_DEV_COREDUMP. There's no Kconfig symbol 
> > > BACKPORT_WANT_DEV_COREDUMP so this select is currently a nop. (In
> > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/30/578 I proposed a patch that emits a
> > > warning in cases like this.)
> > > 
> > > Did you perhaps meant to select WANT_DEV_COREDUMP?
> > 
> > Yes. We'll fix it up in the iwlwifi tree.
> > 
> > Thanks for the report!
> 
> Perhaps you could also look into somehow guarding the call of
> dev_coredumpm(), that this commit added, with checks for
> CONFIG_DEV_COREDUMP. See, I had a quick look at all this and selecting
> WANT_DEV_COREDUMP might not be enough, because DISABLE_DEV_COREDUMP can
> still, well, disable DEV_COREDUMP. Or am I misreading the Kconfig
> symbols that regulate DEV_COREDUMP?

No, you're correctly reading that. However, the devcoredump header file
provides simple functions in this case. That means there's some extra
work (allocating and filling the buffer just to free it immediately) but
it simplifies the code.

johannes

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html