[PATCH v8 1/3] modules: Support extended MODVERSIONS info

[Luis Chamberlain]

On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 10:06:12PM -0700, Matthew Maurer wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 9:37 PM Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof at kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 12:22:36PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > > Matthew Maurer <mmaurer at google.com> writes:
> > > > Adds a new format for MODVERSIONS which stores each field in a separate
> > > > ELF section. This initially adds support for variable length names, but
> > > > could later be used to add additional fields to MODVERSIONS in a
> > > > backwards compatible way if needed. Any new fields will be ignored by
> > > > old user tooling, unlike the current format where user tooling cannot
> > > > tolerate adjustments to the format (for example making the name field
> > > > longer).
> > > >
> > > > Since PPC munges its version records to strip leading dots, we reproduce
> > > > the munging for the new format. Other architectures do not appear to
> > > > have architecture-specific usage of this information.
> > > >
> > > > Reviewed-by: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen at google.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Matthew Maurer <mmaurer at google.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  arch/powerpc/kernel/module_64.c | 24 ++++++++++-
> > >
> > > Acked-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe at ellerman.id.au> (powerpc)
> >
> > Michael, Matthew, why make everyone deal with this instead of just
> > making this an arch thing and ppc would be the only one doing it?
> >
> >   Luis
> >
> 
> I'm not sure I understand - the PPC changes are in an arch-specific
> directory, and triggered through the arch-implemented callback
> mod_frob_arch_sections. What would you like done to make it more of an
> arch-thing?

Sorry, yes, I see that now, that's what I get for late night patch
review. Nevermidn, this all looks good to me now.

  Luis