search for: __section__

...ummy_export_dbg_log_init_f, }; >__asm__ (".globl " "__start_set_orphan_dummy_anno"); >__asm__ (".globl " "__stop_set_orphan_dummy_anno"); >static void const > *__set_orphan_dummy_anno_sym_dummy_export_dbg_log_init_linker_set > __attribute__ ((__section__ ("set_" "orphan_dummy_anno"))) > __attribute__ ((__used__)) = &dummy_export_dbg_log_init_linker_set; >============ linker_script ============= : >SECTIONS { > data : { *(data) } ># when commented, the __start and __stop symbols will be protected. How can I...

...ble 2 MB host page table support for Hardware Assisted Paging (HAP). ### hpetbroadcast diff -r 5af4f2ab06f3 -r e6ec5b2b717f xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c @@ -78,6 +78,10 @@ struct hvm_function_table hvm_funcs __re unsigned long __attribute__ ((__section__ (".bss.page_aligned"))) hvm_io_bitmap[3*PAGE_SIZE/BYTES_PER_LONG]; +/* Xen command-line option to enable HAP */ +static int opt_hap_enabled = 1; +boolean_param("hap", opt_hap_enabled); + static int cpu_callback( struct notifier_block *nfb, unsigned long action, void...

You are right it creates them but sets the protected flag (STV_PROTECTED) which seems to be the cause of my problem. How can I tell it to set the flag as STV_DEFAULT? Thanks A On 5/28/20, 11:30 PM, "Fangrui Song" <maskray at google.com> wrote: NetApp Security WARNING: This is an external email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know

...BUG_ON_ZERO(sizeof(""prefix) > MAX_PARAM_PREFIX_LEN); \ - static const char __param_str_##name[] = prefix #name; \ + static const char __param_str_##name[] = prefix #name; \ static struct kernel_param __moduleparam_const __param_##name \ __used \ __attribute__ ((unused,__section__ ("__param"),aligned(sizeof(void *)))) \ - = { __param_str_##name, ops, perm, level, { arg } } + = { __param_str_##name, ops, VERIFY_OCTAL_PERMISSIONS(perm), \ + level, { arg } } /* Obsolete - use module_param_cb() */ #define module_param_call(name, set, get, arg, perm) \ diff --...

...BUG_ON_ZERO(sizeof(""prefix) > MAX_PARAM_PREFIX_LEN); \ - static const char __param_str_##name[] = prefix #name; \ + static const char __param_str_##name[] = prefix #name; \ static struct kernel_param __moduleparam_const __param_##name \ __used \ __attribute__ ((unused,__section__ ("__param"),aligned(sizeof(void *)))) \ - = { __param_str_##name, ops, perm, level, { arg } } + = { __param_str_##name, ops, VERIFY_OCTAL_PERMISSIONS(perm), \ + level, { arg } } /* Obsolete - use module_param_cb() */ #define module_param_call(name, set, get, arg, perm) \ diff --...

...long) &__syscall_stub_start; // from linker script set_sigstack((void *) STUB_DATA, UM_KERN_PAGE_SIZE); sigemptyset(&sa.sa_mask); sa.sa_flags = SA_ONSTACK | SA_NODEFER; sa.sa_handler = (void *) v; // Use this function. The stub_segv_handler function is defined with: void __attribute__ ((__section__ (".__syscall_stub"))) stub_segv_handler(int sig) {...} I don't actually quite understand the reason all these gyrations are necessary and why it can't just use the signal handler function directly--since it should have been cloned too--but I presume there is a reason or it wouldn...

...16:03:41.000000000 +1100 @@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ struct paravirt_ops /* Mark a paravirt probe function. */ #define paravirt_probe(fn) \ - static void (*__paravirtprobe_##fn)(void) __attribute_used__ \ + static asmlinkage void (*__paravirtprobe_##fn)(void) __attribute_used__ \ __attribute__((__section__(".paravirtprobe"))) = fn extern struct paravirt_ops paravirt_ops;

...st[i] = src[i]; - } } static int __init print_banner(void) diff -r ea8912509a0e include/asm-i386/paravirt.h --- a/include/asm-i386/paravirt.h Wed Aug 16 09:49:27 2006 -0400 +++ b/include/asm-i386/paravirt.h Wed Aug 16 11:34:48 2006 -0400 @@ -110,9 +110,6 @@ struct paravirt_ops __attribute__((__section__(".paravirtprobe"))) = fn extern struct paravirt_ops paravirt_ops; - -/* Overwrite ops struct with non-NULL ops entries from this struct. */ -void overwrite_paravirt_ops(const struct paravirt_ops *ops); /* Non-paravirtualized implementations of various operations for back-ends wh...

...16:03:41.000000000 +1100 @@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ struct paravirt_ops /* Mark a paravirt probe function. */ #define paravirt_probe(fn) \ - static void (*__paravirtprobe_##fn)(void) __attribute_used__ \ + static asmlinkage void (*__paravirtprobe_##fn)(void) __attribute_used__ \ __attribute__((__section__(".paravirtprobe"))) = fn extern struct paravirt_ops paravirt_ops;

...tern u64 sev_status; extern bool sev_enabled; void sme_encrypt_execute(unsigned long encrypted_kernel_vaddr, @@ -49,6 +50,7 @@ void __init mem_encrypt_free_decrypted_mem(void); bool sme_active(void); bool sev_active(void); +bool sev_es_active(void); #define __bss_decrypted __attribute__((__section__(".bss..decrypted"))) @@ -71,6 +73,7 @@ static inline void __init sme_enable(struct boot_params *bp) { } static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; } static inline bool sev_active(void) { return false; } +static inline bool sev_es_active(void) { return false; } static inl...

...e_me_mask; +extern u64 sev_status; extern bool sev_enabled; void sme_encrypt_execute(unsigned long encrypted_kernel_vaddr, @@ -50,6 +51,7 @@ void __init mem_encrypt_init(void); bool sme_active(void); bool sev_active(void); +bool sev_es_active(void); #define __bss_decrypted __attribute__((__section__(".bss..decrypted"))) @@ -72,6 +74,7 @@ static inline void __init sme_enable(struct boot_params *bp) { } static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; } static inline bool sev_active(void) { return false; } +static inline bool sev_es_active(void) { return false; } static inl...

...e_me_mask; +extern u64 sev_status; extern bool sev_enabled; void sme_encrypt_execute(unsigned long encrypted_kernel_vaddr, @@ -50,6 +51,7 @@ void __init mem_encrypt_init(void); bool sme_active(void); bool sev_active(void); +bool sev_es_active(void); #define __bss_decrypted __attribute__((__section__(".bss..decrypted"))) @@ -72,6 +74,7 @@ static inline void __init sme_enable(struct boot_params *bp) { } static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; } static inline bool sev_active(void) { return false; } +static inline bool sev_es_active(void) { return false; } static inl...

...e_me_mask; +extern u64 sev_status; extern bool sev_enabled; void sme_encrypt_execute(unsigned long encrypted_kernel_vaddr, @@ -50,6 +51,7 @@ void __init mem_encrypt_init(void); bool sme_active(void); bool sev_active(void); +bool sev_es_active(void); #define __bss_decrypted __attribute__((__section__(".bss..decrypted"))) @@ -72,6 +74,7 @@ static inline void __init sme_enable(struct boot_params *bp) { } static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; } static inline bool sev_active(void) { return false; } +static inline bool sev_es_active(void) { return false; } static inl...

Hello, The binaries produced by LLVM and other compilers divide code up into various sections, e.g. the .text section. What is the recommended approach to assigning a symbol the address of a section using LLVM? Using GCC/LD, you can do this with a linker script, e.g. in a linker script you can do: _text = .; _stext = .; These symbols are then available in the corresponding C code using an

Some concern was expressed over the lguest review status, so I shall send the patches out again for people to review, to test, to make observations about the author's personal appearance, etc. I'll plan on sending these patches off to Linus in a week's time, assuming all goes well. Thanks. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body

Some concern was expressed over the lguest review status, so I shall send the patches out again for people to review, to test, to make observations about the author's personal appearance, etc. I'll plan on sending these patches off to Linus in a week's time, assuming all goes well. Thanks. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body

...tr_##name[] = prefix #name; \ > + static const char __param_str_##name[] = prefix #name; \ > static struct kernel_param __moduleparam_const __param_##name \ > __used \ > __attribute__ ((unused,__section__ ("__param"),aligned(sizeof(void *)))) \ > - = { __param_str_##name, ops, perm, level, { arg } } > + = { __param_str_##name, ops, VERIFY_OCTAL_PERMISSIONS(perm), \ > + level, { arg } } > > /* Obsolete - use module_param_cb() */ > #define module_...

Couple more bikesheddy things: Is there ever a reason to use a non __builtin_const_p(perms)? Maybe that should be a BUILD_BUG_ON too BUILD_BUG_ON(!builtin_const_p_perms) My brain of little size gets confused by the BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(foo) + vs BUILD_BUG_ON(foo); as it just seems like more text for the same content. Is there any value on the "_ZERO(foo) +" I don't understand?

Couple more bikesheddy things: Is there ever a reason to use a non __builtin_const_p(perms)? Maybe that should be a BUILD_BUG_ON too BUILD_BUG_ON(!builtin_const_p_perms) My brain of little size gets confused by the BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(foo) + vs BUILD_BUG_ON(foo); as it just seems like more text for the same content. Is there any value on the "_ZERO(foo) +" I don't understand?

On Mon, 2014-03-17 at 14:25 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > Erk, our tests are insufficient. Testbuilding an allmodconfig with this > now: Good idea. > diff --git a/include/linux/moduleparam.h b/include/linux/moduleparam.h [] > @@ -188,6 +188,9 @@ struct kparam_array > /* Default value instead of permissions? */ \ > static int __param_perm_check_##name