linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] paravirt.h

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]

Message-Id: <1156275004.27114.34.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:30:04 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc:	Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@....de>,
	virtualization@...ts.osdl.org,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] paravirt.h

Ar Maw, 2006-08-22 am 20:29 +0200, ysgrifennodd Arjan van de Ven:
> > And it doesn't work for VMI or lhype, both of which might modify 
> > paravirt_ops way later in the boot process, when loaded as a module.  
> 
> doesn't this then start to have the same issues that runtime patching
> the system call table had?

It has several I can see that are if anything worse

- Stacked hypervisors stomping each others functions
- Locking required to do updates: and remember our lock functions use
methods in the array
- If we boot patch inline code to get performance natively its almost
impossible to then revert that.


-
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/