From: Oscar Carter <oscar.carter@gmx.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, Oscar Carter <oscar.carter@gmx.com>
Subject: Clarification about the series to modernize the tasklet api
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2020 19:42:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200711174239.GA3199@ubuntu> (raw)
Hi Kees,
I'm working to modernize the tasklet api but I don't understand the reply
to the patch 12/16 [1] of the patch series of Romain Perier [2].
If this patch is combined with the first one, and the function prototypes
are not changed accordingly and these functions don't use the from_tasklet()
helper, all the users that use the DECLARE_TASKLET macro don't pass the
correct argument to the .data field.
#define DECLARE_TASKLET(name, func, data) \
-struct tasklet_struct name = { NULL, 0, ATOMIC_INIT(0), func, data }
+struct tasklet_struct name = { NULL, 0, ATOMIC_INIT(0), (TASKLET_FUNC_TYPE)func, (TASKLET_DATA_TYPE)&name }
The data argument is lost.
If this patch is splitted in two, the first part will build correctly since
there are casts protecting the arguments, but it will not run correctly until
we apply the second part.
Is it correct? Or am I wrong?
The only imperative to apply a patch in a series is that it compiles correctly?
And I suppose that the next ones fix this situation.
At this moment I'm very confused. A bit of light about this will help me a lot.
And sorry if this is a trivial question.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/kernel-hardening/201909301538.CEA6C827@keescook/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/kernel-hardening/20190929163028.9665-1-romain.perier@gmail.com/
Thanks in advance,
Oscar Carter
next reply other threads:[~2020-07-11 17:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-11 17:42 Oscar Carter [this message]
2020-07-13 9:25 ` Clarification about the series to modernize the tasklet api Allen
2020-07-13 10:24 ` Allen
2020-07-13 16:27 ` Kees Cook
2020-07-14 5:09 ` Allen
2020-07-18 12:34 ` Oscar Carter
2020-07-14 0:02 ` Kees Cook
2020-07-14 5:12 ` Allen
2020-07-14 14:27 ` Allen
2020-07-14 23:20 ` Kees Cook
2020-07-15 7:34 ` Allen
2020-07-15 14:51 ` Allen
2020-07-15 15:14 ` Kees Cook
2020-07-15 15:21 ` Allen
2020-07-15 15:29 ` Kees Cook
2020-07-15 15:33 ` Allen
2020-07-13 16:16 ` Kees Cook
2020-07-18 12:21 ` Oscar Carter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200711174239.GA3199@ubuntu \
--to=oscar.carter@gmx.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox