linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 11/11] module: Make module_enable

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: <20200430122321.GA16620@linux-8ccs.fritz.box>
Date:   Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:23:22 +0200
From:   Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>
To:     Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
Cc:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        live-patching@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/11] module: Make module_enable_ro() static again

+++ Jessica Yu [30/04/20 13:40 +0200]:
>+++ Miroslav Benes [30/04/20 13:35 +0200]:
>>On Thu, 30 Apr 2020, Jessica Yu wrote:
>>
>>>+++ Josh Poimboeuf [29/04/20 10:24 -0500]:
>>>>Now that module_enable_ro() has no more external users, make it static
>>>>again.
>>>>
>>>>Suggested-by: Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>
>>>>Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
>>>
>>>Thanks! Since this patch is separate from the rest and it's based on
>>>modules-next, I can just take this last patch through the modules tree.
>>
>>It depends on 8/11 of the series.
>>
>>Acked-by: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
>>
>>for the patch.
>
>Ah yeah, you are right (you meant patch 9/11 right)? Will take both
>through modules-next.

So I'm speaking nonsense apparently. I suggested taking them because
the module patches were based on modules-next. But Miroslav correctly
pointed out that these patches still depend on livepatch removing
module_disable_ro() usage before we can even remove them from
module.c.

So ignore what I said earlier, the whole patchset should be applied
together (I'm assuming the livepatching for-next branch). In any case,
should there be any conflicts with modules-next they should be easy to
resolve. Sorry for the noise!

Jessica