linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v4 0/2] arm64: Stack trace reliability checks in the unwinder

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]

Date:   Fri, 21 May 2021 12:48:34 -0500
From:   "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@...ux.microsoft.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     mark.rutland@....com, jpoimboe@...hat.com, ardb@...nel.org,
        jthierry@...hat.com, catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org,
        jmorris@...ei.org, pasha.tatashin@...een.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        live-patching@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 0/2] arm64: Stack trace reliability checks in the
 unwinder



On 5/21/21 12:47 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:32:52PM -0500, Madhavan T. Venkataraman wrote:
> 
>> I have followed the example in the Kprobe deny list. I place the section
>> in initdata so it can be unloaded during boot. This means that I need to
>> copy the information before that in early_initcall().
> 
>> If the initialization must be performed on first use, I probably have to
>> move SYM_CODE_FUNCTIONS from initdata to some other place where it will
>> be retained.
> 
>> If you prefer this, I could do it this way.
> 
> No, I think if people are fine with this for kprobes they should be fine
> with it here too and if not we can always incrementally improve
> performance - let's just keep things simple and easy to understand for
> now.
> 

OK.

Madhavan