On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Emese Revfy <re.emese@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 15:45:56 -0400 > Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 7:40 PM, Emese Revfy <re.emese@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Thanks for sending this! I'll get it added to my tree for some 0day >> build testing, and then get it into my -next tree. > > I'll send a new patch set soon. I'm working on some fixes and > I would like to implement the handling of return uses to increase the coverage > (which decreases because of the bug fixes :) ). > So please hold off with testing until the next patch. Okay, cool. I'll just do some simple tests with what I have so I can feel like I understand its intended use, etc. :) One change I made was to add this comment in compiler-gcc.h for people that become curious about __nocapture and go looking for its definition (please feel free to adjust for accuracy, etc): /* * The initify gcc-plugin attempts to identify const arguments that are only * used during init (see __init), so they can be moved to the .init.rodata * section. If an argument is passed to a non-init function, it must * normally be assumed that such an argument has been captured by that * function and may be used in the future when .init has been unmapped from * memory. In order to identify functions that are confirmed to not capture * their arguments, the __nocapture() attribute is used so that initify can * better identify candidate variables. */ #ifdef INITIFY_PLUGIN # define __nocapture(...) __attribute__((nocapture(__VA_ARGS__))) #endif -Kees -- Kees Cook Chrome OS & Brillo Security -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
