linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 8/9] Implement kernel live patching for ppc64le (ABIv2)

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]

Date:	Fri, 4 Dec 2015 10:06:20 +0100
From:	Torsten Duwe <duwe@....de>
To:	Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 8/9] Implement kernel live patching for ppc64le
	(ABIv2)

On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 05:24:45PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/livepatch.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
> [...]
> > +#include <linux/module.h>
> > +#include <linux/ftrace.h>
> > +
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_LIVEPATCH
> > +static inline int klp_check_compiler_support(void)
> > +{
> > +#if !defined(_CALL_ELF) || _CALL_ELF != 2
> 
> I am just curious why we do not check CC_USING_MPROFILE_KERNEL
> like in the other similar locations. It would look less cryptic.
> But I am not sure if it is precise enough.

Because a ppc with a gcc > 4.8.5 is not sufficient. The code
currently only works for the PPC ELF ABI v2, a.k.a. ppc64le.
But now that you say it, CC_USING_MPROFILE_KERNEL should go
into that condition as well. Thanks!

	Torsten

--
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/