linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] call sysrq_timer_list

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: <20080108113323.GB11083@elte.hu>
Date:	Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:33:23 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc:	Kyle McMartin <kyle@...artin.ca>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] call sysrq_timer_list_show from a workqueue

* Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> wrote:

> +/* FIXME: Risky: returns a pointer into a module w/o lock */

stupid question: since module unloads are so rare, why isnt this via the 
same mechanism that CPU hotplug uses to securely unregister CPUs? I.e. 
quiet all CPUs, disable irqs on all of them, then unlink the module. 
This would make module unload fundamentally safe, and symbols could be 
looked up lockless. (with the exception of crashing within NMIs, but 
that is not lock safe anyway.)

Or is this a rathole for some reason?

	Ingo
--
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/