[Xen-devel] Re: [GIT PULL] Xen bugfixes

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>]

* Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxx - they dont have Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxx> 
> > tags for automatic back-merging requests. The fixes narrowly 
> > missed v2.6.31.
> >   
> 
> Will do.

Thanks,

        Ingo

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel