linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 2/4] jump_label: use rcu_read_lock() while accessing __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:	Fri, 31 Jul 2015 19:16:27 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
	Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>,
	tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/4] jump_label: use rcu_read_lock() while accessing
 __module_*()

On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 07:08:06PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> __jump_label_mod_text_reserved() should most likely use rcu_read_lock()
> while invoking __module_text_address(). I'm not sure there is anything
> to protect the module pointed by `start' and `end' from removal.
> I *think* the protection is based on the preempt_disable() in
> check_kprobe_address_safe(). That preempt_disable however does not
> protect from module removal on a SMP machine.

Yes it does, seeing how it uses sync_sched().
--
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/