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]

Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1604071745010.27368@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
Date:	Thu, 7 Apr 2016 17:47:00 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To:	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
cc:	Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, 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 Thu, 7 Apr 2016, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:

> > > - try ftrace handler switching idea from v1 cover letter
[ ... ]
> > We probably should not check the stack in atomic context
> 
> Can you elaborate why not?

I admittedly forgot what the "ftrace handler switching idea" is, and am 
not sure where exactly to look for it (could you please point it to me so 
that I can refresh my memory), but generally we can't assume that a memory 
holding stack of a sleeping task hasn't been reclaimed and wouldn't need 
to have been paged in again.

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs