[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1906280124170.32342@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 01:25:13 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>, Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
Johannes Erdfelt <johannes@...felt.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, mhiramat@...nel.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ftrace: Remove possible deadlock between register_kprobe()
and ftrace_run_update_code()
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 01:09:08AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Jun 2019, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > I agree with Josh on this. As the original bug was the race between
> > > ftrace and live patching / modules changing the text from ro to rw and
> > > vice versa. Just protecting the update to the text permissions is more
> > > robust, and should be more self documenting when we need to handle
> > > other architectures for this.
> >
> > How is that supposed to work?
> >
> > ftrace
> > prepare()
> > setrw()
> > setro()
> > patch <- FAIL
>
> /me dodges frozen shark
>
> You are right of course. My brain has apparently already shut off for
> the day.
>
> Maybe a comment or two would help though.
Agreed. That would indeed be useful.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists