On Wed 2017-02-08 10:46:36, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 04:47:50PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > > Notice in this case that klp_target_state is KLP_PATCHED. Which means
> > > that klp_complete_transition() would not call synchronize_rcu() at the
> > > right time, nor would it c
On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 04:47:50PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > Notice in this case that klp_target_state is KLP_PATCHED. Which means
> > that klp_complete_transition() would not call synchronize_rcu() at the
> > right time, nor would it call module_put(). It can be fixed with:
> >
> > @@ -387,7
On Mon 2017-02-06 13:51:48, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 05:44:31PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > > > > @@ -347,22 +354,37 @@ static int __klp_enable_patch(struct klp_patch
> > > > > *patch)
> > > > >
> > > > > pr_notice("enabling patch '%s'\n", patch->mod->name);
> > >
> > And finally, the section "Limitations" has this text under the first
> > bullet:
> >
> > + The patch must not change the semantic of the patched functions.
> >
> > The current implementation guarantees only that either the old
> > or the new function is called. The functions are p
On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 05:44:31PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > > > @@ -347,22 +354,37 @@ static int __klp_enable_patch(struct klp_patch
> > > > *patch)
> > > >
> > > > pr_notice("enabling patch '%s'\n", patch->mod->name);
> > > >
> > > > + klp_init_transition(patch, KLP_PATCHED
On Fri 2017-02-03 14:39:16, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 12:51:16PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > !!! This is the right version. I am sorry again for the confusion. !!!
> >
> > > static int __klp_disable_patch(struct klp_patch *patch)
> > > {
> > > - struct klp_object *obj;
> >
On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 05:41:28PM +0100, Miroslav Benes wrote:
>
> Petr has already mentioned majority of things I too found out, so only
> couple of nits...
>
> > diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-livepatch
> > b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-livepatch
> > index da8
On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 12:51:16PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> !!! This is the right version. I am sorry again for the confusion. !!!
>
> > Change livepatch to use a basic per-task consistency model. This is the
> > foundation which will eventually enable us to patch those ~10% of
> > security pa
Petr has already mentioned majority of things I too found out, so only
couple of nits...
> diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-livepatch
> b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-livepatch
> index da87f43..24b6570 100644
> --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-livepatch
On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > diff --git a/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt
> > b/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt
> > index 7f04e13..fb00d66 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt
>
> > + In that case, arche
!!! This is the right version. I am sorry again for the confusion. !!!
> Change livepatch to use a basic per-task consistency model. This is the
> foundation which will eventually enable us to patch those ~10% of
> security patches which change function or data semantics. This is the
> biggest r
IMPORTANT: Please, forget this version. It is few days old
and incomplete and probably wrong.
I am sorry for confusion.
Best Regards,
Petr
On Thu 2017-01-19 09:46:21, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> Change livepatch to use a basic per-task consistency model. This is the
> foundation which will eventually enable us to patch those ~10% of
> security patches which change function or data semantics. This is the
> biggest remaining piece needed
13 matches
Mail list logo
