linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 23 (objtool (2))

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.21.2007161315490.3958@pobox.suse.cz>
Date:   Thu, 16 Jul 2020 13:20:50 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
cc:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        live-patching@...r.kernel.org, Yannick Cote <ycote@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 23 (objtool (2))

On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 03:41:55PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Wed 2020-07-15 14:10:54, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > > On Wed 2020-07-15 13:11:14, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> > > > Petr, would you agree to revert -flive-patching.
> > > 
> > > Yes, I agree.
> > 
> > Or better to say that I will not block it.
> > 
> > I see that it causes maintenance burden. There are questions about
> > reliability and performance impact. I do not have a magic solution
> > in the pocket.
> > 
> > Anyway, we need a solution to know what functions need to get livepatched.
> > I do not have experience with comparing the assembly, so I do not know
> > how it is complicated and reliable.
> 
> Thanks Petr/Miroslav.  I can do the revert patch.  It doesn't have to be
> a permanent revert.  I'd certainly be willing to ACK it again in the
> future if/when it becomes more ready.

Ok.

> Yannick has agreed to start looking at the objtool function diff
> feature.  It's purely theoretical at the moment, we'll see how it works
> in practice.  We already do something similar in kpatch-build -- it
> differs from the objtool model, but it at least shows that something
> similar is possible.

Great. I'm looking forward to seeing that.

Thanks
Miroslav