Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 28 May 2011 08:39:19 +0200 (CEST) | From | Julia Lawall <> | Subject | Re: [Cocci] Re: status of constification |
| |
On Fri, 27 May 2011, Kees Cook wrote:
> Hi Emese, > > I got distracted, but I'd like to get back to this thread... > > On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 10:37:41PM +0100, Emese Revfy wrote: > > I will gladly break up my current patch for the next -rc by structure > > type or maintainer (some preferred it one way or the other) and send > > it in some time next week so that you can handle the upstream submission > > process (I will continue to maintain my patch in grsecurity). > > > > There are many structures that can be constified, you can use the following > > command to find most of them (use it on an allyesconfig kernel preferably): > > > > grep _ops System.map |grep -Ewi 'b|d' | awk '{print $3}' | \ > > while read i ; do cscope -d -L -1 $i | grep -E "struct[ \t]*([^ ]*)[ \t]*" \ > > --color=none -o | awk '{print $2}' ; done |sort -u > > > > Also there are always new instances of structures going in that should have > > been constified. > > Just in my running kernel, I see 56 _ops structures reported from the above > search. :) > > Do you have a new stack of patches I can help usher into the kernel? I > don't want reinvent the wheel if I don't have to. :) > > > I tried to automate the whole process with Coccinelle but I abandoned it > > because Coccinelle didn't support recursive header file inclusion at the time. > > If someone feels like fixing Coccinelle then I would quickly finish my script > > (it has a few bugs because I could never test it for real), but see the end > > of the mail for the current version. I think it would be a good idea because > > it would take a few hours only to generate a constification patch for a new > > kernel. One thing that probably cannot be automated with Coccinelle is that > > once the script determines that a given structure cannot be constified, it > > cannot undo already emitted patches for the given structure so it must be > > cleaned up by post processing script.
Could I see the semantic patch? The clean up issue sounds interesting. Perhaps there is a way around it.
julia
> Has there been any update to your Coccinelle script since the addition of > -recursive_includes? > > Thanks! > > -Kees > > -- > Kees Cook > Ubuntu Security Team > _______________________________________________ > Cocci mailing list > Cocci@diku.dk > http://lists.diku.dk/mailman/listinfo/cocci > (Web access from inside DIKUs LAN only) >
| |