+++ Jiri Kosina [21/03/16 23:02 +0100]:
On Mon, 21 Mar 2016, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
According to my test that still results in the literal value of
"(64 - 8)".
Alright. But we should be able to special-case it with a two #if checks on
the __SIZEOF_LONG__ value and BUILD_BUG_ON() when __SIZEOF_
On Mon, 21 Mar 2016, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> According to my test that still results in the literal value of
> "(64 - 8)".
Alright. But we should be able to special-case it with a two #if checks on
the __SIZEOF_LONG__ value and BUILD_BUG_ON() when __SIZEOF_LONG__ is not
of one of the ususal siz
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 10:16:17PM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016, Jessica Yu wrote:
>
> > Yes, this is a concern and I'm not sure what the best way to fix it
> > is. If both MODULE_NAME_LEN and KSYM_NAME_LEN were straight up
> > constants, then I think Josh's stringify approach w
On Mon, 21 Mar 2016, Jessica Yu wrote:
> Yes, this is a concern and I'm not sure what the best way to fix it
> is. If both MODULE_NAME_LEN and KSYM_NAME_LEN were straight up
> constants, then I think Josh's stringify approach would have worked
> perfectly. However since MODULE_NAME_LEN translates
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 03:18:32PM -0400, Jessica Yu wrote:
> +++ Miroslav Benes [21/03/16 14:55 +0100]:
> >On Wed, 16 Mar 2016, Jessica Yu wrote:
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >>+struct klp_buf {
> >>+ char symname[KSYM_SYMBOL_LEN];
> >
> >I think it is better to make this KSYM_NAME_LEN. KSYM_SYMBOL_LEN lo
+++ Miroslav Benes [21/03/16 14:55 +0100]:
On Wed, 16 Mar 2016, Jessica Yu wrote:
[...]
+struct klp_buf {
+ char symname[KSYM_SYMBOL_LEN];
I think it is better to make this KSYM_NAME_LEN. KSYM_SYMBOL_LEN looks
like something different and KSYM_NAME_LEN is 128 which you reference
below.
+++ Josh Poimboeuf [21/03/16 12:36 -0500]:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 11:46:51AM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 05:31:57PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/livepatch/core.c b/kernel/livepatch/core.c
> > index 780f00c..2aa20fa 100644
> > --- a/kernel/livepatch/
+++ Petr Mladek [09/02/16 15:01 +0100]:
On Wed 2016-02-03 20:11:09, Jessica Yu wrote:
Reuse module loader code to write relocations, thereby eliminating the need
for architecture specific relocation code in livepatch. Specifically, reuse
the apply_relocate_add() function in the module loader to
+++ Josh Poimboeuf [08/02/16 14:26 -0600]:
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 08:11:09PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote:
Reuse module loader code to write relocations, thereby eliminating the need
for architecture specific relocation code in livepatch. Specifically, reuse
the apply_relocate_add() function in the
+++ Petr Mladek [17/12/15 16:45 +0100]:
On Wed 2015-12-16 00:40:48, Jessica Yu wrote:
Turns out the string parsing stuff, even with the help of lib/string.c, doesn't
look very pretty. As I'm working on v3, I'm starting to think having
klp_write_object_relocations() loop simply through all the el
On Wed 2015-12-16 00:40:48, Jessica Yu wrote:
> Turns out the string parsing stuff, even with the help of lib/string.c,
> doesn't
> look very pretty. As I'm working on v3, I'm starting to think having
> klp_write_object_relocations() loop simply through all the elf sections might
> not be a good i
+++ Miroslav Benes [16/12/15 13:59 +0100]:
On Wed, 16 Dec 2015, Jessica Yu wrote:
+++ Jessica Yu [09/12/15 14:10 -0500]:
> +++ Josh Poimboeuf [08/12/15 12:38 -0600]:
> >
> > There was a lot of discussion for v1, so I'm not sure, but I thought we
> > ended up deciding to get rid of the klp_reloc
On Wed, 16 Dec 2015, Jessica Yu wrote:
> +++ Jessica Yu [09/12/15 14:10 -0500]:
> > +++ Josh Poimboeuf [08/12/15 12:38 -0600]:
> > >
> > > There was a lot of discussion for v1, so I'm not sure, but I thought we
> > > ended up deciding to get rid of the klp_reloc_sec struct? Instead I
> > > think
+++ Jessica Yu [09/12/15 14:10 -0500]:
+++ Josh Poimboeuf [08/12/15 12:38 -0600]:
On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 11:21:17PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote:
Reuse module loader code to write relocations, thereby eliminating the need
for architecture specific relocation code in livepatch. Namely, we reuse
appl
+++ Josh Poimboeuf [10/12/15 15:41 -0600]:
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 04:33:29PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote:
+++ Josh Poimboeuf [10/12/15 08:28 -0600]:
>On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 02:10:14PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote:
>>+++ Josh Poimboeuf [08/12/15 12:38 -0600]:
+ /* For each __klp_rela section f
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 04:33:29PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote:
> +++ Josh Poimboeuf [10/12/15 08:28 -0600]:
> >On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 02:10:14PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote:
> >>+++ Josh Poimboeuf [08/12/15 12:38 -0600]:
> + /* For each __klp_rela section for this object */
> + klp_for_each_reloc
+++ Josh Poimboeuf [10/12/15 08:28 -0600]:
On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 02:10:14PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote:
+++ Josh Poimboeuf [08/12/15 12:38 -0600]:
>>+ /* For each __klp_rela section for this object */
>>+ klp_for_each_reloc_sec(obj, reloc_sec) {
>>+ relindex = reloc_sec-
On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 02:10:14PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote:
> +++ Josh Poimboeuf [08/12/15 12:38 -0600]:
> >>+ /* For each __klp_rela section for this object */
> >>+ klp_for_each_reloc_sec(obj, reloc_sec) {
> >>+ relindex = reloc_sec->index;
> >>+ num_relas = pmod->sechdrs[
+++ Josh Poimboeuf [08/12/15 12:38 -0600]:
On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 11:21:17PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote:
Reuse module loader code to write relocations, thereby eliminating the need
for architecture specific relocation code in livepatch. Namely, we reuse
apply_relocate_add() in the module loader to
+++ Jessica Yu [30/11/15 23:21 -0500]:
Reuse module loader code to write relocations, thereby eliminating the need
for architecture specific relocation code in livepatch. Namely, we reuse
apply_relocate_add() in the module loader to write relocations instead of
duplicating functionality in livepa
On Thu, 12 Nov 2015, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 03:22:44PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote:
> > Looking into this more, I think we do need one __klp_rela section per
> > function being patched. Each rela section is linked to the section to
> > which the relocations apply via the rela
+++ Josh Poimboeuf [12/11/15 14:32 -0600]:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 03:22:44PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote:
Looking into this more, I think we do need one __klp_rela section per
function being patched. Each rela section is linked to the section to
which the relocations apply via the rela section's s
+++ Jessica Yu [12/11/15 14:14 -0500]:
+++ Miroslav Benes [12/11/15 16:27 +0100]:
On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Jessica Yu wrote:
+++ Miroslav Benes [11/11/15 15:30 +0100]:
On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Jessica Yu wrote:
So I guess we don't need klp_reloc anymore.
Yes, that's correct. I am noticing just now
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 03:22:44PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote:
> Looking into this more, I think we do need one __klp_rela section per
> function being patched. Each rela section is linked to the section to
> which the relocations apply via the rela section's sh_info field. In
> SHT_RELA sections, th
+++ Josh Poimboeuf [12/11/15 11:40 -0600]:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 04:27:01PM +0100, Miroslav Benes wrote:
On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Jessica Yu wrote:
> +++ Miroslav Benes [11/11/15 15:30 +0100]:
> > On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Jessica Yu wrote:
> >
> > So I guess we don't need klp_reloc anymore.
>
> Yes, t
+++ Miroslav Benes [12/11/15 16:27 +0100]:
On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Jessica Yu wrote:
+++ Miroslav Benes [11/11/15 15:30 +0100]:
> On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Jessica Yu wrote:
>
> So I guess we don't need klp_reloc anymore.
Yes, that's correct. I am noticing just now that I forgot to remove
the klp_reloc
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 04:27:01PM +0100, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Jessica Yu wrote:
>
> > +++ Miroslav Benes [11/11/15 15:30 +0100]:
> > > On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Jessica Yu wrote:
> > >
> > > So I guess we don't need klp_reloc anymore.
> >
> > Yes, that's correct. I am noticing
On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Jessica Yu wrote:
> +++ Miroslav Benes [11/11/15 15:30 +0100]:
> > On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Jessica Yu wrote:
> >
> > So I guess we don't need klp_reloc anymore.
>
> Yes, that's correct. I am noticing just now that I forgot to remove
> the klp_reloc struct definition from livepatc
On Wed 2015-11-11 13:27:18, Jessica Yu wrote:
> Basically, the patch module code is expected to build the reloc_secs
> list for each object that is being patched. For example in kpatch, the
> patch module generates this list in patch_init(). Like you guessed, it
> does go through all the elf sectio
+++ Miroslav Benes [11/11/15 15:30 +0100]:
On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Jessica Yu wrote:
diff --git a/include/linux/livepatch.h b/include/linux/livepatch.h
index 31db7a0..601e892 100644
--- a/include/linux/livepatch.h
+++ b/include/linux/livepatch.h
@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ struct klp_reloc {
/**
* struct
+++ Petr Mladek [11/11/15 16:22 +0100]:
On Mon 2015-11-09 23:45:53, Jessica Yu wrote:
Reuse module loader code to write relocations, thereby eliminating the
need for architecture specific code in livepatch. Namely, we reuse
apply_relocate_add() in the module loader to write relocs instead of
dup
31 matches
Mail list logo
