[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20220420115257.3498300-1-atomlin@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:52:55 +0100
From: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...hat.com>
To: mcgrof@...nel.org
Cc: cl@...ux.com, pmladek@...e.com, mbenes@...e.cz,
christophe.leroy@...roup.eu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
atomlin@...mlin.com, ghalat@...hat.com, oleksandr@...alenko.name,
neelx@...hat.com
Subject: [PATCH v3 0/2] module: Introduce module unload taint tracking
Hi Luis,
This is based on the latest mcgrof/modules-next branch. I have decided
still to use RCU even though no entry is ever removed from the unloaded
tainted modules list. That being said, if I understand correctly, it is not
safe in some instances to use 'module_mutex' in print_modules(). So instead
we disable preemption to ensure list traversal with concurrent list
manipulation e.g. list_add_rcu(), is safe too.
Changes since RFC v2 [1]
- Dropped RFC from subject
- Removed the newline i.e. "\n" in printk()
- Always include the tainted module's unload count
- Unconditionally display each unloaded tainted module
Please let me know your thoughts.
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220419150334.3395019-1-atomlin@redhat.com/
Aaron Tomlin (2):
module: Make module_flags_taint() accept a module's taints bitmap
directly
module: Introduce module unload taint tracking
init/Kconfig | 11 +++++++
kernel/module/main.c | 73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
2 files changed, 80 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
base-commit: eeaec7801c421e17edda6e45a32d4a5596b633da
--
2.34.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists