linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tracing/profile: Fix profile_disable vs module

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 25 Aug 2009 16:52:43 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing/profile: Fix profile_disable vs module_unload

On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 12:47 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 12:39 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> > > Do you really wish to burden every tracepoint user with the extra 
> > > logic needed to deal with modules?
> > 
> > Not necessarily - i'm just outlining why i think that the 'dont 
> > allow subsystems to utilize tracepoint callbacks' is a restriction 
> > we should not live with voluntarily.
> 
> Well, unless someone has a bright idea that's what it comes down to. 

OK, I still think modules probing their own tracepoints its stupid [*],
but what you could do is iterate the tracepoint's callback list and see
if it has a callback outside of the module code section and then fail
the unload.

[*] in the really utterly fundamentally wrong stupid class.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/