Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 23:08:53 +0100
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <>
To: Kees Cook <>
Cc: Emese Revfy <>,
	"" <>,
	PaX Team <>,
	Brad Spengler <>,
	Michal Marek <>, LKML <>,
	Masahiro Yamada <>,
	linux-kbuild <>,,
	Catalin Marinas <>,
	Rasmus Villemoes <>,
	David Brown <>,
	"" <>,
	Thomas Gleixner <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Jeff Layton <>,
	Arnd Bergmann <>, Sam Ravnborg <>,
	Karsten Keil <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] Add the initify gcc plugin

On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 03:45:56PM -0400, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 7:40 PM, Emese Revfy <> wrote:
> > If a function is called by __init and __exit functions as well then
> > the plugin moves it to the __exit section. This causes false positive
> > section mismatch errors/warnings that I don't know how to handle yet.
> Should the mismatch checker be updated to recognize this case? Without
> the plugin, I assume these kinds of functions would only ever be
> marked for __exit? If so, should the plugin strip the __init marking
> and only add __exit?

That sounds like a problem for architectures that still discard the
__exit section at link time to reduce the size of the linked kernel
image - though, obviously, if using the plugin results in a smaller
kernel image _with_ the exit sections, then there's a net benefit

RMK's Patch system:
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.