linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v1.9 00/14] livepatch: hybrid consistency model

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, 1 Apr 2016 17:38:18 +0200
From:	Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To:	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc:	Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, Jessica Yu <jeyu@...hat.com>,
	Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	live-patching@...r.kernel.org, Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1.9 00/14] livepatch: hybrid consistency model

On Fri 2016-04-01 15:39:44, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Fri 2016-03-25 14:34:47, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > These patches are still a work in progress, but Jiri asked that I share
> > them before I go on vacation next week.  Based on origin/master because
> > it has CONFIG_STACK_VALIDATION.
> 
> I have to follow Mirek and say that it is a great work.
> 
> > There's also a func->immediate flag which allows users to specify that
> > certain functions in the patch can be applied without per-task
> > consistency.  This might be useful if you want to patch a common
> > function like schedule(), and the function change doesn't need
> > consistency but the rest of the patch does.
> 
> I like the possibility to immediately patch some functions or objects.
> Just note that this is not yet completely implemented and it is not
> on the TODO list.

Correction. Only patch and func can be marked by the "immediate" flag, not
an object. It looks fine.

> We probably should not set func->transition flag when func->immediate
> is set or when the related func->object is set. It currently happens
> only when patch->immediate is set.

This is true but only for func->transition.


> Also we should ignore immediate functions and objects when the stack
> is checked.

This is already done. I have missed this.

I am sorry for confusion. I should have shaken my head even more
before writing.

Best Regards,
Petr