[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.21.1910160843420.7750@pobox.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 08:51:27 +0200 (CEST)
From: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
To: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...hat.com>
cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mhiramat@...nel.org,
bristot@...hat.com, jbaron@...mai.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...nel.org, namit@...are.com, hpa@...or.com, luto@...nel.org,
ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org, jpoimboe@...hat.com,
live-patching@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] x86/ftrace: Use text_poke()
On Tue, 15 Oct 2019, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> On 10/15/19 10:13 AM, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> > Yes, it does. klp_module_coming() calls module_disable_ro() on all
> > patching modules which patch the coming module in order to call
> > apply_relocate_add(). New (patching) code for a module can be relocated
> > only when the relevant module is loaded.
>
> FWIW, would the LPC blue-sky2 model (ie, Steve's suggestion @ plumber's where
> livepatches only patch a single object and updates are kept on disk to handle
> coming module updates as they are loaded) eliminate those outstanding
> relocations and the need to perform this late permission flipping?
Yes, it should, but we don't have to wait for it. PeterZ proposed a
different solution to this specific issue in
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191015141111.GP2359@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net/
It should not be a problem to create a live patch module like that and the
code in kernel/livepatch/ is almost ready. Something like
module_section_disable_ro(mod, section) (and similar for X protection)
should be enough. Module reloads would still require juggling with the
protections, but I think it is all feasible.
Miroslav
Powered by blists - more mailing lists