linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/9] x86/dumpstack: Improve opcodes dumping in the Code: section

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, 6 Mar 2018 10:47:56 -0800
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] x86/dumpstack: Improve opcodes dumping in the Code: section

On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 1:49 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>
> Make it read the whole buffer of code_bytes size in one go. By default
> use a statically allocated 64 bytes buffer. If "code_bytes=" is supplied
> on the cmdline a new buffer gets allocated.

Are these always serialized? For oopses, I think we end up serializing
with die_lock, but is that always the case?

Maybe at least a comment about why a static allocation is ok?

             Linus