linux-kernel - Re: [PING PATCH v7] kallsyms: new /proc/kallmodsyms with builtin modules

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:   Wed, 12 Jan 2022 08:30:04 -0800
From:   Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To:     Nick Alcock <nick.alcock@...cle.com>
Cc:     jeyu@...nel.org, masahiroy@...nel.org,
        linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        arnd@...db.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, eugene.loh@...cle.com,
        kris.van.hees@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PING PATCH v7] kallsyms: new /proc/kallmodsyms with builtin
 modules

On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 08:19:12PM +0000, Nick Alcock wrote:
> /proc/kallsyms is very useful for tracers and other tools that need to
> map kernel symbols to addresses.
> 
> It would be useful

It took me digging on archives to see to *who* this is useful to.
The short answer seeme to be dtrace. Can you work on getting use
of this for something (I don't know, maybe kernelshark?) that does
not taint the kernel? Last I checked using dtrace on linux taints the
kernel.

Without valid upstream users I see no need to add more complexity to the
kernel. And complexity added by tainting modules or not upstream modules
just implies maintaining something for someone who is not working
upstream. I don't want to add more code or "features" to create a
maintenance burden for code not upstream or code that taints the kernel.
module.c is already the second largest file on the kernel/ directory and
I want to ensure we keep it clean, not add fluff for speculated features
which no proper non-taining Linux tool is using.

Without a valid non-taining user being made very clear with a value-add,
I will have to ignore this.

  Luis