From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752894AbZIJR0s (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Sep 2009 13:26:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752838AbZIJR0s (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Sep 2009 13:26:48 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:46769 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752834AbZIJR0r (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Sep 2009 13:26:47 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 19:26:29 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Cc: Ingo Molnar , the arch/x86 maintainers , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Xen-devel , Stable Kernel , Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Xen bugfixes Message-ID: <20090910172629.GA10689@elte.hu> References: <4AA83F99.5040401@goop.org> <20090910051648.GA1335@elte.hu> <4AA93466.6020607@goop.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AA93466.6020607@goop.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > On 09/09/09 22:16, Ingo Molnar wrote: > >> +# Make sure __phys_addr has no stackprotector > >> +nostackp := $(call cc-option, -fno-stack-protector) > >> +CFLAGS_ioremap.o := $(nostackp) > >> + > >> > > Sure we could move __phys_addr into its own file and thus avoid > > turning off stackprotector for the rest of ioremap.c? > > > > I'm not very keen on having zillions of tiny files just to cope > with the lack of per-function stackprotector disable. I don't see > any code in ioremap.c that would really benefit from > stack-protector anyway; there are no local arrays. > > At least __phys_addr and friends aren't terribly closely related > to ioremap so it would at least make some sense. Agreed, i wouldnt do it just for the stackprotector benefit (it's really stupid that GCC does not allow per function exceptions) - but here __phys_addr() looked out of place a bit. > [...] Patch below. Looks like a nice cleanup. Mind sticking it into your next pull request? > >> +CFLAGS_mmu.o := $(nostackp) > >> > > A similar argument could be made here - what proportion of mmu.c is > > affected? > > More. It would be a fairly arbitrary chunk of code to split out > into a separate file. Ok - i'd not do it then. > > Also, once the commits have hit upstream feel free bounce them > > to stable@kernel.org - they dont have Cc: > > tags for automatic back-merging requests. The fixes narrowly > > missed v2.6.31. > > > > Will do. Thanks, Ingo From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Xen bugfixes Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 19:26:29 +0200 Message-ID: <20090910172629.GA10689@elte.hu> References: <4AA83F99.5040401@goop.org> <20090910051648.GA1335@elte.hu> <4AA93466.6020607@goop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AA93466.6020607@goop.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Cc: Xen-devel , the arch/x86 maintainers , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Ingo Molnar , Tejun Heo , Stable Kernel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org * Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > On 09/09/09 22:16, Ingo Molnar wrote: > >> +# Make sure __phys_addr has no stackprotector > >> +nostackp := $(call cc-option, -fno-stack-protector) > >> +CFLAGS_ioremap.o := $(nostackp) > >> + > >> > > Sure we could move __phys_addr into its own file and thus avoid > > turning off stackprotector for the rest of ioremap.c? > > > > I'm not very keen on having zillions of tiny files just to cope > with the lack of per-function stackprotector disable. I don't see > any code in ioremap.c that would really benefit from > stack-protector anyway; there are no local arrays. > > At least __phys_addr and friends aren't terribly closely related > to ioremap so it would at least make some sense. Agreed, i wouldnt do it just for the stackprotector benefit (it's really stupid that GCC does not allow per function exceptions) - but here __phys_addr() looked out of place a bit. > [...] Patch below. Looks like a nice cleanup. Mind sticking it into your next pull request? > >> +CFLAGS_mmu.o := $(nostackp) > >> > > A similar argument could be made here - what proportion of mmu.c is > > affected? > > More. It would be a fairly arbitrary chunk of code to split out > into a separate file. Ok - i'd not do it then. > > Also, once the commits have hit upstream feel free bounce them > > to stable@kernel.org - they dont have Cc: > > tags for automatic back-merging requests. The fixes narrowly > > missed v2.6.31. > > > > Will do. Thanks, Ingo