linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 15/39] x86/ibt,kprobes: Fix more +0 assumptions

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: <1646236571.m56yc0kmzw.naveen@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Wed, 02 Mar 2022 21:29:04 +0530
From:   "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, alyssa.milburn@...el.com,
        andrew.cooper3@...rix.com, hjl.tools@...il.com,
        joao@...rdrivepizza.com, jpoimboe@...hat.com,
        keescook@...omium.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        mark.rutland@....com, mbenes@...e.cz,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        ndesaulniers@...gle.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
        samitolvanen@...gle.com, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 15/39] x86/ibt,kprobes: Fix more +0 assumptions

Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> How does this look?

I gave this a quick test on powerpc and this looks good to me.

> --- a/include/linux/kprobes.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kprobes.h
> @@ -265,7 +265,6 @@ extern int arch_init_kprobes(void);
>  extern void kprobes_inc_nmissed_count(struct kprobe *p);
>  extern bool arch_within_kprobe_blacklist(unsigned long addr);
>  extern int arch_populate_kprobe_blacklist(void);
> -extern bool arch_kprobe_on_func_entry(unsigned long offset);

There is a __weak definition of this function in kernel/kprobes.c which 
should also be removed.


Thanks,
Naveen