[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOMdWSLFSci1DCMsQLBoX-ADP0cHbhudfvRKokdM+pEQEfpnAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 14:55:22 +0530
From: Allen <allen.lkml@...il.com>
To: Oscar Carter <oscar.carter@....com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: Clarification about the series to modernize the tasklet api
Oscar,
>
> 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].
Am working on the same too. I did try reaching out to Romain but not luck.
Let's hope we are not duplicating efforts.
> 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 }
>
Ideally this above bit should have been part of the first patch.
> 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.
>
I have a few more things to complete, I shall have it done and pushed
to github. Will write back
once that's done.
- Allen
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.
