From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Jan Glauber <jang@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, castet.matthieu@free.fr,
sliakh.lkml@gmail.com, jiang@cs.ncsu.edu, mingo@elte.hu
Subject: Re: Undoing module RONX protection
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 20:13:36 +0930 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <874o5v6drb.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110418092801.GC3837@infradead.org>
On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 11:23:48 +0200, Jan Glauber <jang@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> While debugging I stumbled over two problems in the code that protects module
> pages.
>
> First issue is that disabling the protection before freeing init or unload of
> a module is not symmetric with the enablement. For instance, if pages are set
> to RO the page range from module_core to module_core + core_ro_size is
> protected. If a module is unloaded the page range from module_core to
> module_core + core_size is set back to RW.
> So pages that were not set to RO are also changed to RW.
> This is not critical but IMHO it should be symmetric.
>
> Second issue is that while set_memory_rw & set_memory_ro are used for
> RO/RW changes only set_memory_nx is involved for NX/X. One would await that
> the inverse function is called when the NX protection should be removed,
> which is not the case here, unless I'm missing something.
>
> The following patch addresses both issues. Works on s390. Boot tested on x86.
>
> Please comment,
Applied, minus the S/390 EXPORT_SYMBOL which Christoph pointed out. I
turned your mail into the commit message, since it was clearer and more
verbose. I don't see why they would be different.
Might have been nicer as three separate patches, in future.
Thanks!
Rusty.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-18 13:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-18 9:23 Jan Glauber
2011-04-18 9:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-18 10:43 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2011-04-21 14:19 ` Jan Glauber
2011-04-27 5:12 ` Undoing module RONX protection fix Rusty Russell
2011-04-28 10:08 ` Jan Glauber
2011-04-28 11:36 ` Rusty Russell
2011-04-28 13:43 ` Jan Glauber
2011-04-29 4:41 ` Rusty Russell
2011-04-29 16:35 ` Jan Glauber
2011-04-30 6:13 ` Rusty Russell
2011-04-18 12:40 ` Undoing module RONX protection Jan Glauber
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=874o5v6drb.fsf@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=castet.matthieu@free.fr \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jang@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=jiang@cs.ncsu.edu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=sliakh.lkml@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome