All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mathias Krause <minipli@googlemail.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, Mason <slash.tmp@free.fr>,
	Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: String literals in __init functions
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 08:05:09 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+rthh9H4C6b=eGdNmFj3Vb+rHUCPOuaDL1h5i_WXWtNGZYS2A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150326144058.56ef6916b00ad38030296089@linux-foundation.org>

On 26 March 2015 at 22:40, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 21:49:06 +0100 Mathias Krause <minipli@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Andrew, what's your opinion on such a patch set? Do you too think it's
>> useful? Or do you share Ingo's fear about the additional maintenance
>> burden?
>
> I don't think the burden would be toooo high, although it will mess the
> code up a bit.
>
> The post-build checking for section reference mismatches will help,
> although that seems to have got itself turned off (what happened
> there?).

Seem to be working fine here.

This is make M=lib/, building the test module:
  CC [M]  lib/test_module.o
  Building modules, stage 2.
  MODPOST 1 modules
  LD [M]  lib/test_module.ko

This is the same module with two pi_info() calls in a non-__init
function, therefore generating section mismatches:
  CC [M]  lib/test_module.o
  Building modules, stage 2.
  MODPOST 1 modules
WARNING: modpost: Found 2 section mismatch(es).
To see full details build your kernel with:
'make CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y'
  LD [M]  lib/test_module.ko

> Did anyone look at writing a postprocessor for the .s files?  It
> doesn't look like it will be too hard from an initial peek.
>
> Did anyone ask the gcc developers?  I'd have thought that a function-wide
>
>         __attribute__((__string_section__(foo))
>
> wouldn't be a ton of work to implement.

The point is you cannot blindly mark all strings referenced from
__init / __exit code to end up in a matching string section because
strings in this code might have to live longer when passed to
functions keeping a pointer on them. For example, the name passed to
class_create() won't be copied. If that one would go into the
.init.rodata section automatically, we would have dangling pointers
after the .init.* memory got freed.
To know if it's safe to automatically put a string into an .init /
.exit section one needs to see the whole code. That's why I'm
reasoning it needs to be an LTO pass, not a .s post-processor or
function wide section attribute. Or, as in my approach, a source level
annotation.

Thanks,
Mathias

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: minipli@googlemail.com (Mathias Krause)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: String literals in __init functions
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 08:05:09 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+rthh9H4C6b=eGdNmFj3Vb+rHUCPOuaDL1h5i_WXWtNGZYS2A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150326144058.56ef6916b00ad38030296089@linux-foundation.org>

On 26 March 2015 at 22:40, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 21:49:06 +0100 Mathias Krause <minipli@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Andrew, what's your opinion on such a patch set? Do you too think it's
>> useful? Or do you share Ingo's fear about the additional maintenance
>> burden?
>
> I don't think the burden would be toooo high, although it will mess the
> code up a bit.
>
> The post-build checking for section reference mismatches will help,
> although that seems to have got itself turned off (what happened
> there?).

Seem to be working fine here.

This is make M=lib/, building the test module:
  CC [M]  lib/test_module.o
  Building modules, stage 2.
  MODPOST 1 modules
  LD [M]  lib/test_module.ko

This is the same module with two pi_info() calls in a non-__init
function, therefore generating section mismatches:
  CC [M]  lib/test_module.o
  Building modules, stage 2.
  MODPOST 1 modules
WARNING: modpost: Found 2 section mismatch(es).
To see full details build your kernel with:
'make CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y'
  LD [M]  lib/test_module.ko

> Did anyone look at writing a postprocessor for the .s files?  It
> doesn't look like it will be too hard from an initial peek.
>
> Did anyone ask the gcc developers?  I'd have thought that a function-wide
>
>         __attribute__((__string_section__(foo))
>
> wouldn't be a ton of work to implement.

The point is you cannot blindly mark all strings referenced from
__init / __exit code to end up in a matching string section because
strings in this code might have to live longer when passed to
functions keeping a pointer on them. For example, the name passed to
class_create() won't be copied. If that one would go into the
.init.rodata section automatically, we would have dangling pointers
after the .init.* memory got freed.
To know if it's safe to automatically put a string into an .init /
.exit section one needs to see the whole code. That's why I'm
reasoning it needs to be an LTO pass, not a .s post-processor or
function wide section attribute. Or, as in my approach, a source level
annotation.

Thanks,
Mathias

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-03-27  7:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-25 17:56 String literals in __init functions Mason
2015-03-25 17:56 ` Mason
2015-03-25 18:01 ` Joe Perches
2015-03-25 18:01   ` Joe Perches
2015-03-26 12:40   ` Mason
2015-03-26 12:40     ` Mason
2015-03-26 16:13     ` Joe Perches
2015-03-26 16:13       ` Joe Perches
2015-03-26 16:37       ` Mathias Krause
2015-03-26 16:37         ` Mathias Krause
2015-03-26 17:53         ` Joe Perches
2015-03-26 17:53           ` Joe Perches
2015-03-26 20:49           ` Mathias Krause
2015-03-26 20:49             ` Mathias Krause
2015-03-26 21:40             ` Andrew Morton
2015-03-26 21:40               ` Andrew Morton
2015-03-26 21:58               ` Joe Perches
2015-03-26 21:58                 ` Joe Perches
2015-03-26 22:15                 ` Andrew Morton
2015-03-26 22:15                   ` Andrew Morton
2015-03-27  7:16                   ` Mathias Krause
2015-03-27  7:16                     ` Mathias Krause
2015-04-02 16:00                 ` Joseph Myers
2015-04-02 16:00                   ` Joseph Myers
2015-04-02 16:23                   ` Joe Perches
2015-04-02 16:23                     ` Joe Perches
2015-03-27  7:05               ` Mathias Krause [this message]
2015-03-27  7:05                 ` Mathias Krause
2015-03-27  7:32                 ` Joe Perches
2015-03-27  7:32                   ` Joe Perches

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CA+rthh9H4C6b=eGdNmFj3Vb+rHUCPOuaDL1h5i_WXWtNGZYS2A@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=minipli@googlemail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=joe@perches.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=slash.tmp@free.fr \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.