Re: [PATCH v11 09/14] module: Move kallsyms support into a separate file

From: Steven Rostedt
Date: Sun Jul 03 2022 - 09:23:28 EST


On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 09:33:24 +0100
Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Fri 2022-07-01 15:34 -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > Poke, did you get to implement this yet?
>
> Hi Luis, Steve,
>
> Firstly, apologies for the delay.
>
> I believe I found the issue:
>
> diff --git a/kernel/module/kallsyms.c b/kernel/module/kallsyms.c
> index 1b0780e20aab..84808706af5c 100644
> --- a/kernel/module/kallsyms.c
> +++ b/kernel/module/kallsyms.c
> @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ void add_kallsyms(struct module *mod, const struct load_info *info)
> mod->kallsyms->typetab[i];
> dst[ndst] = src[i];
> dst[ndst++].st_name = s - mod->core_kallsyms.strtab;
> - s += strscpy(s, &mod->kallsyms->strtab[src[i].st_name],
> + s += strlcpy(s, &mod->kallsyms->strtab[src[i].st_name],
> KSYM_NAME_LEN) + 1;
> }
> }
>
> That being said, I need to examine the precise differences between each
> implementation; albeit, I believe we can revert this particular change. I
> will send a patch for a wider discussion shortly.
>
> - Before
>
> $ grep -a -E '^[0-9a-f]{16} [^a-z].*\[virtio_console\]' /proc/kallsyms
> 0000000000000000 notifier_del_vio [virtio_console]
> 0000000000000000 show_port_name [virtio_console]
> 0000000000000000 port_debugfs_open [virtio_console]
>
> - After the above modification
>
> $ grep -a -E '^[0-9a-f]{16} [^a-z].*\[virtio_console\]' /proc/kallsyms
> $ grep -a -m 3 -E '^[0-9a-f]{16} [a-z].*\[virtio_console\]' /proc/kallsyms
> 0000000000000000 t notifier_del_vio [virtio_console]
> 0000000000000000 t show_port_name [virtio_console]
> 0000000000000000 t port_debugfs_open [virtio_console]
>
>

BTW, *NEVER* modify code that you are moving. Really, *NEVER* do that!

It makes debugging much more difficult, like in this very case.

*ALWAYS* have the moving of code be a separate patch. Keep as most
identical as humanly possible. Even keep white space errors the same!
You can add a clean up patch before or after the move. But never do it
as one patch!

You even stated "no functional change" which was a lie. Converting
strlcpy() to strscpy() *is* a functional change!

-- Steve