linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] module: Make .static_call

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: <97beceb2-dd87-4b7f-a269-b6612e5557a3@csgroup.eu>
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2025 15:06:28 +0100
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
To: Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>, Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
 Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>, Daniel Gomez
 <da.gomez@...sung.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
 Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>, Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] module: Make .static_call_sites read-only after init

Hi Petr,

Le 23/12/2024 à 10:37, Petr Pavlu a écrit :
> Section .static_call_sites holds data structures that need to be sorted and
> processed only at module load time. The section is never modified afterwards.
> Make it therefore read-only after module initialization to avoid any
> (non-)accidental modifications.
> 
> Petr Pavlu (3):
>    module: Constify parameters of module_enforce_rwx_sections()
>    module: Add a separate function to mark sections as read-only after
>      init
>    module: Make .static_call_sites read-only after init
> 
>   kernel/module/internal.h   |  7 ++++--
>   kernel/module/main.c       | 18 +++------------
>   kernel/module/strict_rwx.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>   3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> 
> 

We have a problem at the moment with ro_after_init sections, isn't it 
better to fix it before adding new stuff to ro_after_init ?

This series conflicts with my series which aims at fixing up 
ro_after_init handling in modules, see 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-modules/cover/cover.1733427536.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu/

I was expecting my series to land in modules-next, do you or Luis plan 
to take it anytime soon ?

Christophe