[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161117111909.GB12273@leverpostej>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 11:19:10 +0000
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
"Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
David Windsor <dave@...gbits.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Anvin, H Peter" <h.peter.anvin@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [RFC v4 PATCH 00/13] HARDENED_ATOMIC
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 11:16:42AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 10:36:47AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Nov 2016, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > Also, we should really have a "make spatch" target so that we can run
> > > the thing concurrently with -j80 or somesuch, because as is coccinelle
> > > is unbearably slow.
> >
> > In the kernel, there is already the make coccicheck infrastructure. It
> > suffices to add the semantic patch to a subdirectory of
> > scripts/coccinelle.
>
> Shiny.. however:
>
> $ make coccicheck COCCI=kref.cocci MODE=patch V=1
> /bin/bash ./scripts/coccicheck
>
> Please check for false positives in the output before submitting a patch.
> When using "patch" mode, carefully review the patch before submitting it.
>
> Processing kref.cocci
> with option(s) ""
>
> Message example to submit a patch:
> The semantic patch that makes this change is available
> in kref.cocci.
>
> More information about semantic patching is available at
> http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/
>
> Running (8 in parallel): /usr/bin/spatch -D patch --very-quiet --cocci-file kref.cocci --dir . -I ./arch/x86/include -I ./arch/x86/include/generated/uapi -I ./arch/x86/include/generated -I ./include -I ./arch/x86/include/uapi -I ./include/uapi -I ./include/generated/uapi --include ./include/linux/kconfig.h --jobs 8 --chunksize 1
> coccicheck failed
How odd. I took your patch, added a "virtual patch" line, and ran:
$ make coccicheck COCCI=/home/mark/kref.cocci MODE=patch > kref.patch
... and after ~30 seconds I had a valid looking patch on stdout.
[mark@...erpostej:~/src/linux]% spatch --version
spatch version 1.0.0-rc19 with Python support and with PCRE support
I'm using a v4.9-rc4 tree.
Thanks,
Mark.
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.
