[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46D2F281.5030305@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 11:49:21 -0400
From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
CC: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, ananth@...ibm.com,
prasanna@...ibm.com, anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ibm.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
systemtap-ml <systemtap@...rces.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][kprobes] support kretprobe-blacklist
Hi Christoph,
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2007 at 03:43:04PM -0400, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>> This patch introduces architecture dependent kretprobe
>> blacklists to prohibit users from inserting return
>> probes on the function in which kprobes can be inserted
>> but kretprobes can not.
>
> I don't like this at all. If people want to shoot themselves into
> their own foot using kernel modules they have an unlimited number
> of ways to do this, and even more with kprobes, so there's no point
> in making it a little harder for some cases.
Would you mean that the kernel need not to check whether the probe
point is safe or not?
Actually, there are many ways to shoot themselves from kernel modules.
Even so, IMHO, it is benefit for people that the kernel rejects at least
those obviously (and known) dangerous operation.
--
Masami Hiramatsu
Software Engineer
Hitachi Computer Products (America) Inc.
Software Solutions Division
e-mail: mhiramat@...hat.com, masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists