linux-kernel - Re: Bug with paravirt ops and livepatches

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: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1604061038120.27016@pobox.suse.cz>
Date:	Wed, 6 Apr 2016 10:43:06 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
To:	Jessica Yu <jeyu@...hat.com>
cc:	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
	Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
	Chris J Arges <chris.j.arges@...onical.com>,
	eugene.shatokhin@...alab.ru, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	pmladek@...e.cz
Subject: Re: Bug with paravirt ops and livepatches

On Wed, 6 Apr 2016, Miroslav Benes wrote:

> Anyway I see there are some new comments on github. I'll look at those. 
> But I'd prefer to discuss all the relevant things (that is kpatch 
> unspecific) here. It would make it easier.

And you do (after seeing dates of the posts there), sorry for the noise.

Jessica, I think I am perfectly fine with introducing some arch-specific 
code because of this problem.

We used generic apply_relocate_add() because it was a single 
arch-independent entry point. There is no such things for paravirt_ops, 
alternatives, jump labels and such things. In fact only module_finalize() 
is there and that is not enough. So some arch-specific code in livepatch 
seems to be unnecessary.

Cheers,
Miroslav