linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] x86 paravirt_ops: binary patching infrastructure

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:	Mon, 7 Aug 2006 07:38:13 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@....de>
To:	virtualization@...ts.osdl.org
Cc:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] x86 paravirt_ops: binary patching infrastructure

On Monday 07 August 2006 06:48, Rusty Russell wrote:

>  
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT
> +void apply_paravirt(struct paravirt_patch *start, struct paravirt_patch *end)

It would be better to merge this with the existing LOCK prefix patching
or perhaps the normal alternative() patcher (is there any particular
reason you can't use it?)

Three alternative patching mechanisms just seems to be too many

-Andi
-
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/