linux-kernel - Re: [RETRY] [PATCH] load_module: no BUG if module

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 27 Sep 2006 12:10:26 -0700
From:	"Ed Swierk" <eswierk@...stra.com>
To:	"Greg KH" <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au
Subject: Re: [RETRY] [PATCH] load_module: no BUG if module_subsys uninitialized

On 9/26/06, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> wrote:
> So, with this patch the module will still not be loaded properly, right?
> Well, I guess at least we don't oops... ok.

Correct. sys_init_module() ends up returning an error to
/sbin/modprobe, which trickles down to request_module() if it was
invoked via kmod. The module doesn't get loaded, but at least the
error message states which module it is, and as you say, at least we
don't oops.

I think that not oopsing is pretty important in a case where a goofy
but technically valid configuration (compiling Unix sockets as a
module, and trying to boot with a rootfs containing a version of
/sbin/hotplug that requires Unix sockets) collides with an obscure
kernel implementation detail (initcall ordering).

--Ed
-
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/