[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5c649320-a9bf-ae7f-5102-483bc34d219f@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2019 13:05:02 -0400
From: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...hat.com>
To: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, jikos@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] livepatch: Clear relocation targets on a module
removal
On 9/2/19 12:13 PM, Miroslav Benes wrote:
>> I can easily foresee more problems like those in the future. Going
>> forward we have to always keep track of which special sections are
>> needed for which architectures. Those special sections can change over
>> time, or can simply be overlooked for a given architecture. It's
>> fragile.
>
> Indeed. It bothers me a lot. Even x86 "port" is not feature complete in
> this regard (jump labels, alternatives,...) and who knows what lurks in
> the corners of the other architectures we support.
>
> So it is in itself reason enough to do something about late module
> patching.
>
Hi Miroslav,
I was tinkering with the "blue-sky" ideas that I mentioned to Josh the
other day. I dunno if you had a chance to look at what removing that
code looks like, but I can continue to flesh out that idea if it looks
interesting:
https://github.com/joe-lawrence/linux/tree/blue-sky
A full demo would require packaging up replacement .ko's with a
livepatch, as well as "blacklisting" those deprecated .kos, etc. But
that's all I had time to cook up last week before our holiday weekend here.
Regards,
-- Joe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists