Hi,

On 19/09/2016 11:27, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.09.16 at 18:38, <konrad.w...@oracle.com> wrote:
--- a/xen/arch/arm/livepatch.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/livepatch.c
@@ -117,6 +117,20 @@ bool arch_livepatch_symbol_ok(const struct livepatch_elf 
*elf,
     return true;
 }

+bool arch_livepatch_symbol_deny(const struct livepatch_elf *elf,
+                                const struct livepatch_elf_sym *sym)
+{
+#ifdef CONFIG_ARM_32
+    /*
+     * Xen does not use Thumb instructions - and we should not see any of
+     * them. If we do, abort.
+     */
+    if ( sym->name && *sym->name == '$' && sym->name[1] == 't' )

Please use sym->name[0] for readability. Also, you may want to check the length of the symbol before checking the second character.


I'm not sure here: Are all symbols starting with $t to be rejected, or
only $t but not e.g. $txyz? According to some other code I have
lying around it ought to be "$t" and any symbols starting with "$t.",
and would be in line with patch 6. But I guess the ARM maintainers
will know best.

Only $t and $t.* should be rejected. All the others may be valid in the future.

Looking at the spec, I am wondering if we should also check the type and binding of the symbols. I have the impression that the naming is specific to STT_NOTYPE and STB_LOCAL. Any opinions?

Similar question for the previous patch (#6).

Regards,

--
Julien Grall

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Reply via email to