linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] livepatch: Introduce force sysfs attribute

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: <20170811211131.n7mo4xsucteba7hz@treble>
Date:   Fri, 11 Aug 2017 16:11:31 -0500
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To:     Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
Cc:     jeyu@...nel.org, jikos@...nel.org, pmladek@...e.com,
        lpechacek@...e.cz, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] livepatch: Introduce force sysfs attribute

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 12:48:12PM +0200, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> Now there is a sysfs attribute called "force", which provides two
> functionalities, "signal" and "force" (previously "unmark"). I haven't
> managed to come up with better names. Proposals are welcome. On the
> other hand I do not mind it much.

Now "force" has two meanings, which is a little confusing.  What do you
think about just having two separate write-only sysfs flags?

  echo 1 > /sys/kernel/livepatch/signal
  echo 1 > /sys/kernel/livepatch/force

That way there's no ambiguity.

-- 
Josh