linux-kernel - Re: [patches] new text patching for review

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:08:39 -0700
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
CC:	patches@...-64.org, Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"S. P. Prasanna" <prasanna@...ibm.com>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
Subject: Re: [patches] new text patching for review

Andi Kleen wrote:
> Either not use any pvops or make sure all the pvops patching is atomic
> on the local CPU.
>   

Erk, not really keen on that.  Sounds complicated, unless there's a nice
general algorithm.

> Ok you can avoid MCEs by not enabling them until after you patch (which I think
> is the case currently), but it's more difficult with NMIs.
>
> The plain NMI handler is probably auditable.
> Or set a flag that makes the NMI handler just return during patching?
>   

I think that's probably the simplest, if nobody will miss it.

    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/