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: <20061117065828.GA25155@infradead.org>
Date:	Fri, 17 Nov 2006 06:58:29 +0000
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@...ibm.com>
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 Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 08:47:32AM +0200, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
> > i am talking about a clean/standard way to do such thing
> > (without overwrite the mem address of the function and replace it in a
> > dirty way...)
> 
> k42 supports "dynamic hot-swap" and there's been some work done to
> bring it into Linux, see e.g.,
> http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/k42-discussion/2006-October/001615.html.

This kind of stuff is just sick.  Better let them play with their research
OS for this kind of thing :)  In practice any non-trivial bug fix requires
changes to global data structures so reloading a module doesn't make sense.
And for module-specific problems you should be able to hack around using
kprobes if you really need (but then again for a mission critical system
you should have proper active-active failover clustering anyway)
-
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/