linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/8] livepatch: Add atomic replace

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:31:47 +0200
From:   Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To:     Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
Cc:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
        Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
        Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...hat.com>,
        Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
        Evgenii Shatokhin <eshatokhin@...tuozzo.com>,
        live-patching@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] livepatch: Add atomic replace

On Mon 2018-04-09 15:53:03, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> > > +	 * see klp_init_object_loaded().
> > > +	 */
> > > +	if (!func->new_func && !func->nop)
> > >  		return -EINVAL;
> > 
> > >  
> > >  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&func->stack_node);
> > > @@ -742,6 +920,9 @@ static int klp_init_object_loaded(struct klp_patch *patch,
> > >  			return -ENOENT;
> > >  		}
> > >  
> > > +		if (func->nop)
> > > +			func->new_func = (void *)func->old_addr;
> > > +
> > 
> > These changes make it more obvious that 'new_func' isn't quite the right
> > name.  It should really be 'new_addr' IMO.
> 
> I think we wanted to point out the difference from old_addr which is 
> initialized with the symbol name while new_func is initialized with the 
> new function itself (function pointer). I agree though that it looks 
> awkward in this context and I'm not against changing it to new_addr.

I am fine with the rename. I was confused by "new_func" several times
in the past. "new_addr" makes it clear that we are setting an address in
compare with the name in "old_name".


> Petr, could you also add a note to the changelog why we need to setup 
> new_func for nop functions, please? It's not obvious because of the hack 
> in klp_ftrace_handler() 
> (klp_cancel_transition()->...->klp_check_stack_func() needs it).

Yup.

Best Regards,
Petr