linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] s390/perf: fix 'start' address of module's map

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:	Wed, 27 Jul 2016 10:05:53 -0300
From:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc:	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>, anton@...ba.org,
	Song Shan Gong <gongss@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, jolsa@...nel.org,
	dsahern@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390/perf: fix 'start' address of module's map

Em Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 07:24:26PM +1000, Michael Ellerman escreveu:
> Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org> writes:
> > Em Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 10:14:18PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger escreveu:
> >> On 07/26/2016 09:50 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >> > So I could as well use what is in /sys/module/tun/sections/.text instead
> >> > of reading it from /proc/modules and, in s390, reading it from
> >> > /sys/module/tun/sections/.text.

> >> > Do you see any problem with using this approach for _all_ arches?

> >> I think it should work well for _all_ arches but it will probably be
> >> hard to test this without help. 

> > Well, we could check for the cases we don't know, i.e. read from both
> > and warn about cases where it is different, except for s390 where we now
> > which is the right one to pick.

> >> I wouldn't be surprised if other architectures than s390 actually have
> >> the same issue, so doing this for everybody might atually fix this somewhere
> >> else.

> > Would be nice to get info from other arch people, Michael, how this goes
> > on ppc?

> It doesn't look like this is a problem on powerpc - at least I haven't
> heard of it.

> Looking at a system I have here, for all modules (26) the value in
> /proc/modules matches the .text section in /sys.

> So I think using /sys should be fine for us.

Thanks for checking.

- Arnaldo