linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 15/16] module: Move where we mark modules RO,X

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: <20191023090708.GQ1817@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Wed, 23 Oct 2019 11:07:08 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     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, jeyu@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 15/16] module: Move where we mark modules RO,X

On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 04:40:23PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Oct 2019 22:24:01 +0200
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:

> > I'm not particularly proud of the "__function__" hack, but it works :/ I
> 
> If anything, that should be defined as a macro:
> 
> #define TRACE_EVENT_FIELD_SPECIAL "__trace_event_special__"
> 
> And use that to test?

Possibly, also, we should probably start with a character that C doesn't
allow in typenames, like '$'.

That way we can have a much shorter string and still be certain it will
never conflict; "$func" comes to mind.

> > couldn't come up with anything else for [uk]probes which seem to have
> > dynamic fields and if we're having it then syscall_enter can also make
> > use of it, the syscall_metadata crud was going to be ugly otherwise.
> > 
> > (also, win on LOC)
> 
> I'm more worried about text/data bloat. But if anything, we may be able
> to deal with that later.

We use almost the exact same data the function would've used, except we
don't have the actual function. I just don't see how it can be more.