linux-kernel - Re: PATCH v6 3/6] livepatch: Initial support for dynamic structures

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:   Mon, 5 Feb 2018 11:33:18 +0100
From:   Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To:     Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
Cc:     jpoimboe@...hat.com, jikos@...nel.org,
        Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>, jeyu@...nel.org,
        Evgenii Shatokhin <eshatokhin@...tuozzo.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PATCH v6 3/6] livepatch: Initial support for dynamic structures

On Wed 2018-01-31 16:39:04, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2018, Petr Mladek wrote:
> 
> > From: Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>
> > 
> > We are going to add a feature called atomic replace. It will allow to
> > create a patch that would replace all already registered patches.
> > For this, we will need to dynamically create funcs' and objects'
> > for functions that are not longer patched.
> > 
> > This patch adds basic framework to handle such dynamic structures.
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/livepatch.h b/include/linux/livepatch.h
> > index e5db2ba7e2a5..21cad200f949 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/livepatch.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/livepatch.h
> > @@ -35,12 +35,22 @@
> >  #define KLP_UNPATCHED	 0
> >  #define KLP_PATCHED	 1
> >  
> > +/*
> > + * Function type is used to distinguish dynamically allocated structures
> > + * and limit some operations.
> > + */
> > +enum klp_func_type {
> > +	KLP_FUNC_ANY = -1,	/* Substitute any type */
> > +	KLP_FUNC_ORIGINAL = 0,  /* Original statically defined structure */
> 
> Wouldn't KLP_FUNC_STATIC be better? KLP_FUNC_ORIGINAL confused me couple 
> of times.

OK, I am going to use KLP_FUNC_STATIC in v7.

Best Regards,
Petr