linux-kernel - Re: livepatch/module: remove livepatch module notifier

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: <20160216004809.GA29917@packer-debian-8-amd64.digitalocean.com>
Date:	Mon, 15 Feb 2016 19:48:09 -0500
From:	Jessica Yu <jeyu@...hat.com>
To:	Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
Cc:	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Seth Jennings <sjenning@...hat.com>,
	Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.com>,
	Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
	Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: livepatch/module: remove livepatch module notifier

+++ Jiri Kosina [16/02/16 00:42 +0100]:
>On Mon, 15 Feb 2016, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>
>> So I think the commit causing the regression is 5156dca34a3e, which
>> occurred in the 4.5 cycle, *not* in 4.4.
>
>Agreed, by "4.4 regresion" I mean "regression compared to 4.4"; i.e.
>regression that will become real issue once 4.5 is released.
>
>> Also it's my understanding that only the third patch ("remove ftrace
>> module notifier") is needed to fix the regression, and the other patches
>> are just general improvements.  So if needed I think we can just rebase
>> that patch (which already has Rusty's ack I believe) and send it to
>> Linus now.
>
>3/4 and 4/4 are be sufficient, yes (although I'd like to have this
>confimed by Jessica, as she apparently already has a reliable testcase).

Yes, so Josh is right; technically only patch 3/4 "ftrace/module:
remove ftrace module notifier" is sufficient enough to fix the bug,
and patch 4/4 is just a natural extension of that change. Since I'm
going to be sending out another patchset anyway without the module.c
cleanups, I'll just keep them together.

Jessica

>To be honest: I was skiing (and being offline) thursday - sunday :), so my
>original plan was to get Ack from Rusty in the meantime, and then send
>pull request to Linus once I am back on sunday evening.
>
>This is not going to happen, so we have to start with plan B (which is
>pushing just 3/4 and 4/4). Jessica, could you please send me updated (and
>tested on your side) patchset with module.c cleanups omitted?
>
>Steven, I'd appreciate if you could tell me whether your Ack to
>"ftrace/module: remove ftrace module notifier" still holds even if
>module.c changes are not happening.
>
>Thanks,
>
>-- 
>Jiri Kosina
>SUSE Labs
>