Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1167629AbdDXJIj (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Apr 2017 05:08:39 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:56416 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1167499AbdDXJIa (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Apr 2017 05:08:30 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com CEEF223E6D0 Authentication-Results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bhe@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com CEEF223E6D0 Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 17:08:24 +0800 From: Baoquan He To: Fengguang Wu Cc: dave.jiang@intel.com, keescook@chromium.org, Yinghai Lu , x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , tglx@linutronix.de, kbuild-all@01.org, hpa@zytor.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, Borislav Petkov , dyoung@redhat.com, mingo@kernel.org Subject: Re: [kbuild-all] [RFC PATCH] KASLR: mem_avoid_memmap_index can be static Message-ID: <20170424090824.GA6089@x1> References: <201704241606.VlTnAXb4%fengguang.wu@intel.com> <20170424084818.GA10777@lkp-wsm-ep2> <20170424090040.GC2310@x1> <20170424090428.sa7boyuhkyklqxv5@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170424090428.sa7boyuhkyklqxv5@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.0 (2016-08-17) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.29]); Mon, 24 Apr 2017 09:08:30 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1464 Lines: 43 On 04/24/17 at 05:04pm, Fengguang Wu wrote: > Hi Baoquan, > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 05:00:40PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > > Hi Fengguang, > > > > Thanks for pointing it out! > > > > I am fine with defining mem_avoid_memmap_index it as static variable. > > While Liyang suggested using a local static inside mem_avoid_memmap, > > then mem_avoid_memmap_index is not needed any more. Do you think it's OK > > to you? > > Yes, that'd be a better solution. It's a robot generated patch and is > open for optimization or correction. Oh, the tip robot is so great! Thanks for telling, then let me repost. > > > On 04/24/17 at 04:48pm, kbuild test robot wrote: > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu > > > --- > > > kaslr.c | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c > > > index 6649ecd..7190d35 100644 > > > --- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c > > > +++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c > > > @@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ struct mem_vector { > > > #define MAX_MEMMAP_REGIONS 4 > > > > > > static bool memmap_too_large; > > > -int mem_avoid_memmap_index; > > > +static int mem_avoid_memmap_index; > > > extern unsigned long get_cmd_line_ptr(void); > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > kbuild-all mailing list > > kbuild-all@lists.01.org > > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/kbuild-all