On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Atish Patra wrote:
> On 11/07/2017 04:42 PM, Y Song wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11/8/17 6:47 AM, Y Song wrote:
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>
>
> On 11/8/
On 11/07/2017 04:42 PM, Y Song wrote:
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 11/8/17 6:47 AM, Y Song wrote:
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 11/8/17 6:14 AM, Y Song wrote:
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 12:37 AM, Naveen N. Rao
wrote:
Alexei
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On 11/8/17 6:47 AM, Y Song wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11/8/17 6:14 AM, Y Song wrote:
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 12:37 AM, Naveen N. Rao
wrote:
>
>
> Alex
On 11/8/17 6:47 AM, Y Song wrote:
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 11/8/17 6:14 AM, Y Song wrote:
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 12:37 AM, Naveen N. Rao
wrote:
Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 11/7/17 12:55 AM, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
I thought such struct shouldn't chan
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On 11/8/17 6:14 AM, Y Song wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 12:37 AM, Naveen N. Rao
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 11/7/17 12:55 AM, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
>>
>>
>> I thought such struct should
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 1:31 PM, Atish Patra wrote:
> On 11/07/2017 03:14 PM, Y Song wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 12:37 AM, Naveen N. Rao
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 11/7/17 12:55 AM, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
>>
>>
>> I thought such struct shouldn't
On 11/8/17 6:14 AM, Y Song wrote:
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 12:37 AM, Naveen N. Rao
wrote:
Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 11/7/17 12:55 AM, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
I thought such struct shouldn't change layout.
If it is we need to fix include/linux/compiler-clang.h to do that
anon struct as well.
On 11/07/2017 03:14 PM, Y Song wrote:
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 12:37 AM, Naveen N. Rao
wrote:
Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 11/7/17 12:55 AM, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
I thought such struct shouldn't change layout.
If it is we need to fix include/linux/compiler-clang.h to do that
anon struct as wel
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 12:37 AM, Naveen N. Rao
wrote:
> Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>>
>> On 11/7/17 12:55 AM, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
I thought such struct shouldn't change layout.
If it is we need to fix include/linux/compiler-clang.h to do that
anon struct as well.
>>>
>>>
>>> We
Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 11/7/17 12:55 AM, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
I thought such struct shouldn't change layout.
If it is we need to fix include/linux/compiler-clang.h to do that
anon struct as well.
We considered that, but it looked to be very dependent on the version of
gcc used to build t
On 11/7/17 12:55 AM, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
I thought such struct shouldn't change layout.
If it is we need to fix include/linux/compiler-clang.h to do that
anon struct as well.
We considered that, but it looked to be very dependent on the version of
gcc used to build the kernel. But, this may be
On 11/02/2017 11:58 PM, Sandipan Das wrote:
For added security, the layout of some structures can be
randomized by enabling CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTRUCT. One
such structure is task_struct. To build BPF programs, we
use Clang which does not support this feature. So, if we
attempt to read a field
Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 11/5/17 2:31 AM, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
Hi Alexei,
Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 11/3/17 3:58 PM, Sandipan Das wrote:
For added security, the layout of some structures can be
randomized by enabling CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTRUCT. One
such structure is task_struct. To b
Hi Alexei, Naveen,
On 11/04/2017 11:01 PM, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
>
> I think the offsets described in dwarf were incorrect with
> CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTRUCT, but I'll let Sandipan confirm that.
>
I think that the offsets described in dwarf are probably incorrect when
CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTR
On 11/5/17 2:31 AM, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
Hi Alexei,
Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 11/3/17 3:58 PM, Sandipan Das wrote:
For added security, the layout of some structures can be
randomized by enabling CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTRUCT. One
such structure is task_struct. To build BPF programs, we
use C
Hi Alexei,
Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 11/3/17 3:58 PM, Sandipan Das wrote:
For added security, the layout of some structures can be
randomized by enabling CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTRUCT. One
such structure is task_struct. To build BPF programs, we
use Clang which does not support this feature.
On 11/3/17 3:58 PM, Sandipan Das wrote:
For added security, the layout of some structures can be
randomized by enabling CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTRUCT. One
such structure is task_struct. To build BPF programs, we
use Clang which does not support this feature. So, if we
attempt to read a field of a
For added security, the layout of some structures can be
randomized by enabling CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTRUCT. One
such structure is task_struct. To build BPF programs, we
use Clang which does not support this feature. So, if we
attempt to read a field of a structure with a randomized
layout within
18 matches
Mail list logo
