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: <20200605142009.GA5150@linux-8ccs.fritz.box>
Date:   Fri, 5 Jun 2020 16:20:10 +0200
From:   Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
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>,
        Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/11] module: Make module_enable_ro() static again

+++ Guenter Roeck [05/06/20 06:24 -0700]:
>On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:24:53AM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>> 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>
>> Acked-by: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
>
>Apparently this patch made it into the upstream kernel on its own,
>not caring about its dependencies. Results are impressive.
>
>Build results:
>	total: 155 pass: 101 fail: 54
>Qemu test results:
>	total: 431 pass: 197 fail: 234
>
>That means bisects will be all but impossible until this is fixed.
>Was that really necessary ?

Sigh, I am really sorry about this. We made a mistake in handling
inter-tree dependencies between livepatching and modules-next,
unfortunately :-( Merging the modules-next pull request next should
resolve the module_enable_ro() not defined for
!ARCH_HAS_STRICT_MODULE_RWX build issue. The failure was hidden in
linux-next since both trees were always merged together. Again, it
doesn't excuse us from build testing our separate trees more
rigorously.