[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 22:58:45 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>
Cc: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, keescook@...omium.org,
arnd@...db.de, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
h.peter.anvin@...el.com, will.deacon@....com,
David Windsor <dwindsor@...il.com>,
Hans Liljestrand <ishkamiel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v4 PATCH 03/13] kernel: identify wrapping atomic usage
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:24:38PM +0200, Elena Reshetova wrote:
> include/linux/blktrace_api.h | 2 +-
> include/linux/irqdesc.h | 2 +-
> include/linux/kgdb.h | 2 +-
> include/linux/padata.h | 2 +-
> include/linux/perf_event.h | 10 ++--
> include/linux/sched.h | 2 +-
> kernel/audit.c | 8 +--
> kernel/auditsc.c | 4 +-
> kernel/debug/debug_core.c | 16 +++---
> kernel/events/core.c | 27 +++++-----
> kernel/irq/manage.c | 2 +-
> kernel/irq/spurious.c | 2 +-
> kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 2 +-
That's it for kernel/locking/ ? So qspinlock really needs the overflow
tests?
Colour me less than impressed with the quality of audit.
> kernel/padata.c | 4 +-
> kernel/profile.c | 14 ++---
> kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c | 61 ++++++++++-----------
> kernel/rcu/tree.c | 36 +++++++------
> kernel/rcu/tree.h | 18 ++++---
> kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h | 6 +--
> kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h | 12 ++---
> kernel/rcu/tree_trace.c | 14 ++---
> kernel/sched/auto_group.c | 4 +-
> kernel/time/timer_stats.c | 11 ++--
> kernel/trace/blktrace.c | 6 +--
> kernel/trace/ftrace.c | 4 +-
> kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c | 100 ++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> kernel/trace/trace_clock.c | 4 +-
> kernel/trace/trace_functions_graph.c | 4 +-
> kernel/trace/trace_mmiotrace.c | 8 +--
> 29 files changed, 199 insertions(+), 188 deletions(-)
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.
