linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv3 2/3] kernel: add support for live patching

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: <20141121182912.GA1887@cerebellum.variantweb.net>
Date:	Fri, 21 Nov 2014 12:29:12 -0600
From:	Seth Jennings <sjenning@...hat.com>
To:	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Cc:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
	Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.cz>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.cz>, Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	live-patching@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, kpatch@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 2/3] kernel: add support for live patching

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 06:35:47PM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 11/21/2014, 05:40 PM, Seth Jennings wrote:
> >>> --- /dev/null
> >>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/livepatch.h
> >>> @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
> ...
> >>> +#ifndef _ASM_X86_LIVEPATCH_H
> >>> +#define _ASM_X86_LIVEPATCH_H
> >>> +
> >>> +#include <linux/module.h>
> >>> +
> >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_LIVE_PATCHING
> >>> +extern int klp_write_module_reloc(struct module *mod, unsigned long type,
> >>> +				  unsigned long loc, unsigned long value);
> >>> +
> >>> +#else
> >>> +static int klp_write_module_reloc(struct module *mod, unsigned long type,
> >>
> >> static inline?
> > 
> > I think the practice is to let the compiler handle inline determination
> > unless you are sure that the compiler isn't inlining something you think
> > it should.
> 
> Although you are right, it is a correct C, gcc specs (6.39) suggests to
> use 'static inline' on such functions. gcc then shall inline such functions.

Fair enough.  Queued up.

Thanks,
Seth

> 
> And if you look around in the kernel, we use that combination almost
> everywhere.
> 
> thanks,
> -- 
> js
> suse labs
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe live-patching" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
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/