linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Static calls

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: <188e9e90-ed8a-18d9-fc69-c208b80404f1@solarflare.com>
Date:   Fri, 7 Dec 2018 16:49:40 +0000
From:   Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
CC:     <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <x86@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Static calls

On 07/12/18 16:06, Edward Cree wrote:
> Sorry if this has been pointed out before (it's a very long thread), but
>  in the out-of-line implementation, it appears that static_call_update()
>  never alters key->func.  Am I right in thinking that this should be
>  fixed by adding 'WRITE_ONCE(key->func, func);' just after the call to
>  arch_static_call_transform() on line 159 of include/linux/static_call.h?
On further examination, it's worse than that.

Why does the CONFIG_HAVE_STATIC_CALL_OUTLINE static_call_update() not
 call __static_call_update()?  It contains nothing but a BUILD_BUG_ON,
 which isn't likely to update anything.

-Ed