linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/7] UBP, XOL and Uprobes [ Summary of Comments and actions to be taken ]

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: <1264157257.4283.1529.camel@laptop>
Date:	Fri, 22 Jan 2010 11:47:37 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	ananth@...ibm.com
Cc:	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	utrace-devel <utrace-devel@...hat.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>,
	Maneesh Soni <maneesh@...ibm.com>,
	Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ibm.com>,
	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/7] UBP, XOL and Uprobes [ Summary of Comments
 and actions to be taken ]

On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 12:54 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 12:32:32PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > Here is a summary of the Comments and actions that need to be taken for
> > the current uprobes patchset. Please let me know if I missed or
> > misunderstood any of your comments.  
> > 
> > 1. Uprobes depends on trap signal.
> > 	Uprobes depends on trap signal rather than hooking to the global
> > die notifier. It was suggested that we hook to the global die notifier.
> > 
> > 	In the next version of patches, Uprobes will use the global die
> > 	notifier and look at the per-task count of the probes in use to
> > 	see if it has to be consumed.
> > 
> > 	However this would reduce the ability of uprobe handlers to
> > 	sleep. Since we are dealing with userspace, sleeping in handlers
> > 	would have been a good feature. We are looking at ways to get
> > 	around this limitation.
> 
> We could set a TIF_ flag in the notifier to indicate a breakpoint hit
> and process it in task context before the task heads into userspace.

Make that optional, not everybody might want that. Either provide a
simple trampoline or use a flag to indicate the callback be called from
process context on registration.

--
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/