linux-kernel - Re: changing internal kernel system mechanism in runtime by a module patch

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: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0611162247560.12473@yvahk01.tjqt.qr>
Date:	Thu, 16 Nov 2006 22:49:38 +0100 (MET)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>
cc:	Yitzchak Eidus <ieidus@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: changing internal kernel system mechanism in runtime by a module
 patch


On Nov 16 2006 20:29, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 09:19:50PM +0200, Yitzchak Eidus wrote:
>> is it possible to replace linux kernel internal functions such as
>> schdule () to lets say my_schdule ()  in a run time with a module
>> patch???

Nothing is impossible.

>> (so that every call in the kernel to schdule() will go to my_schdule()... ) 
>> ???
>> 
>> i am talking about a clean/standard way to do such thing

Not clean. Not standard.
And it sounds evil too.

>> (without overwrite the mem address of the function and replace it in a
>> dirty way...)
>
>No.

You would have to patch _every_ callsite. That's too tedious to be 
useful.

(Hey there is SMP alternatives which sounds like it did just that - 
anyone?)



	-`J'
-- 
-
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/