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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2020 15:22:24 +0100 From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org> To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>, Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com> Subject: Re: [patch part-II V2 01/13] context_tracking: Ensure that the critical path cannot be instrumented On Sun, Mar 08, 2020 at 11:24:00PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > context tracking lacks a few protection mechanisms against instrumentation: > > - While the core functions are marked NOKPROBE they lack protection > against function tracing which is required as the function entry/exit > points can be utilized by BPF. Just to clarify things up: IIUC, BPF scripts can be called from the function graph tracer hooks, and that BPF code uses RCU, right? > > - static functions invoked from the protected functions need to be marked > as well as they can be instrumented otherwise. > > - using plain inline allows the compiler to emit traceable and probable > functions. > > Fix this by adding the missing notrace/NOKPROBE annotations and converting > the plain inlines to __always_inline. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> Acked-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists