linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] livepatch: add atomic replace

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: <nycvar.YFH.7.76.1710181535110.9294@jbgna.fhfr.qr>
Date:   Wed, 18 Oct 2017 15:36:42 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To:     Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
cc:     Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
        jeyu@...nel.org, pmladek@...e.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] livepatch: add atomic replace

On Wed, 18 Oct 2017, Miroslav Benes wrote:

> 3. Drop immediate. It causes problems only and its advantages on x86_64 
> are theoretical. You would still need to solve the interaction with atomic 
> replace on other architecture with immediate preserved, but that may be 
> easier. Or we can be aggressive and drop immediate completely. The force 
> transition I proposed earlier could achieve the same.

After brief off-thread discussion, I've been thinking about this a bit 
more and I also think that we should claim immediate "an experiment that 
failed", especially as the force functionality (which provides equal 
functionality from the userspace POV) will likely be there sonnish.

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs