linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -tip 0/4] Text edit lock and atomic text

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: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0903061310550.23248@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date:	Fri, 6 Mar 2009 13:12:19 -0500 (EST)
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
cc:	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip 0/4] Text edit lock and atomic text_poke()


On Fri, 6 Mar 2009, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:

> * Masami Hiramatsu (mhiramat@...hat.com) wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Here is a series of patches which introduce text_mutex for protecting
> > editing kernel text from each other subsystems, and make text_poke()
> > atomic by using fixmap.
> > 
> > BTW,
> > 
> > > Paravirt and alternatives are always done when SMP is inactive, so there is no
> > > need to use locks.
> > 
> > Mathieu, I'm not sure that means. alternatives will be called from module
> > init code and other place where the system has already been running multi-
> > -threads(and they use smp_alt mutex). So, is it possible that those functions
> > will sleep or yield to another process?
> > 
> 
> As I remember, module code uses text_poke_early when modifying the
> module text _before_ the module is made available to the rest of the
> kernel. Therefore, it behaves as if it was in a UP system, and that's
> ok, because only one CPU has to touch the text. Therefore, there is no
> need to use text_poke, and therefore no need to take the text mutex.
> 
> Or maybe has it changed ? But I doubt so.
> 

That is correct. Currently ftrace simply does a probe_kernel_write on 
module code to convert the calls to mcount into nops. This is done before 
the module is available, and does not require stop_machine nor break 
points. Since modules are not included in the DEBUG_RODATA there's no need 
to play games with the page tables either.

-- Steve

--
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/