[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <475804F5.4781.35D49FA@pageexec.freemail.hu>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:19:33 +0200
From: pageexec@...email.hu
To: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
CC: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 06/11] Text Edit Lock - Alternative code for x86
On 5 Dec 2007 at 21:02, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Fix a memcpy that should be a text_poke (in apply_alternatives).
>
> Use kernel_wp_save/kernel_wp_restore in text_poke to support DEBUG_RODATA
> correctly and so the CPU HOTPLUG special case can be removed.
>
> Add text_poke_early, for alternatives and paravirt boot-time and module load
> time patching.
>
> Notes:
> - we use a macro for kernel_wp_save/restore to mimic local_irq_save/restore: the
> argument is passed without &.
sorry to chime in again, but lately i've been thinking that the
cr0 argument is not really needed if one can ensure that calls
to the kernel open/close macros won't nest (i checked and even
in the PaX case it's easy to ensure, even desirable in fact).
in your case it's also true for now and i can't think of a situation
where you'd really want to nest in the future (that'd mean opening
up the kernel while some complex piece of code runs, more complex
than a mere memset at least ;-). what do you think?
--
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