linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] livepatch: Fix having __klp

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <30b09639-42e3-48f5-8e7a-12d2589f20e4@suse.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2026 09:34:20 +0100
From: Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
Cc: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
 Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...hat.com>,
 Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>, Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...nel.org>,
 Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>, Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...mlin.com>,
 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] livepatch: Fix having __klp_objects relics in
 non-livepatch modules

On 1/21/26 10:04 PM, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 09:28:16AM +0100, Petr Pavlu wrote:
>> +void *klp_locate_section_objs(const struct module *mod, const char *name,
>> +			      size_t object_size, unsigned int *nr_objs)
>> +{
>> +	struct klp_modinfo *info = mod->klp_info;
>> +
>> +	for (int i = 1; i < info->hdr.e_shnum; i++) {
>> +		Elf_Shdr *shdr = &info->sechdrs[i];
>> +
>> +		if (strcmp(info->secstrings + shdr->sh_name, name))
>> +			continue;
>> +
>> +		*nr_objs = shdr->sh_size / object_size;
>> +		return (void *)shdr->sh_addr;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	*nr_objs = 0;
>> +	return NULL;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(klp_locate_section_objs);
> 
> How about we make it even more generic with something like
> 
> void *klp_find_section_by_name(const struct module *mod, const char *name,
> 			       size_t *sec_size);
> 
> ?
> 
> I think that would help the code read more clearly.
Ok, I'll update it.

-- 
Thanks,
Petr