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: <ZbfmNiY52KdAet7_@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 09:53:58 -0800
From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To: Changbin Du <changbin.du@...wei.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Xiaoyi Su <suxiaoyi@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v2] modules: wait do_free_init correctly

On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 10:03:04AM +0800, Changbin Du wrote:
> The commit 1a7b7d922081 ("modules: Use vmalloc special flag") moves
> do_free_init() into a global workqueue instead of call_rcu(). So now
> rcu_barrier() can not ensure that do_free_init has completed. We should
> wait it via flush_work().
> 
> Without this fix, we still could encounter false positive reports in
> W+X checking, and rcu synchronization is unnecessary.

You didn't answer my question, which should be documented in the commit log.

Does this mean we never freed modules init because of this? If so then
your commit log should clearly explain that. It should also explain that
if true (you have to verify) then it means we were no longer saving
the memory we wished to save, and that is important for distributions
which do want to save anything on memory. You may want to do a general
estimate on how much that means these days on any desktop / server.

  Luis

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ